Legal Opinion

Hinson v. Britt

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 20, 1950No. 95PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEeviN, J.

Motions to strike out separate parts of pleadings are sanctioned by this provision of the Code of Civil Procedure: “If irrelevant ■or redundant matter is inserted in a pleading, it may be stricken out on motion of any person aggrieved thereby, but this motion must be made before answer or demurrer, or before an extension of time to plead is granted.” G.S. 1-153.

The City of Asheville Board of Alcoholic Control is empowered by law to appoint one or more law enforcement officers having “the same powers •and authorities ... as other peace officers.” 1947 Session Laws, C. 1083; G.S. 18-46. Any…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Ozburn v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1891
  2. State v. . LewisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
  3. Scott v. . BryanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
  4. Pemberton v. City of GreensboroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
  5. In Re WinglerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Pinnix v. ToomeySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  2. Council v. Dickerson's, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  3. Lutz Industries, Inc. v. Dixie Home StoresSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  4. Penn Dixie Lines, Inc. v. GrannickSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  5. Daniel v. GardnerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API