Legal Opinion

King v. Motley

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 13, 1950No. 534PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWiNBOrne, J.

“Tbe office of demurrer is to test tbe sufficiency of a pleading, admitting, for tbe purpose, tbe truth of tbe allegations of fact contained therein; and ordinarily relevant inferences of fact, necessarily deducible therefrom, are also admitted . . .,” Stacy, C. J., in Ballinger v. Thomas, 195 N.C. 517, 142 S.E. 761. See also McCampbell v. Building & Loan Asso., 231 N.C. 647, 58 S.E. 2d 617, and cases there cited.

Tbe statute G-.S. 1-151 requires that “in tbe construction of a pleading for tbe purpose of determining its effect its, allegations shall be liberally construed with a view to…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Ballinger v. . ThomasSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
  2. Dickerson v. . Refining Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  3. Roberts v. RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  4. Dickerson v. Atlantic Refining Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  5. McCampbell v. Valdese Building & Loan Ass'nSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Norburn v. MacKieSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  2. Willoughby v. KENNETH W. WILKINS, MD, PACourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
  3. Guerry v. American Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  4. Clinard v. LambethSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  5. Bryant v. Little River Ice Co. of Zebulon, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1951

8 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