PEOPLES OIL COMPANY v. Richardson
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBranch, J.
The sole question presented for decision is: Did the allegations of defendant’s further answer and defense and counterclaim allege facts sufficient to constitute a defense or to state a cause of action entitling her to any relief?
It is apparent that plaintiff’s motion to strike challenged the legal sufficiency of defendant’s further answer and defense and coun terclaim, and therefore it will be treated as a demurrer. Williams v. Hunter, 257 N.C. 754, 127 S.E. 2d 546.
In the case of Aman v. Walker, 165 N.C. 224, 81 S.E. 162, the Court stated clearly the principles as to fraudulent conveyances.…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Aman v. . WalkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- State Ex Rel. East Lenoir Sanitary District v. City of LenoirSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1958
- Stewart v. . CarySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
- Stewart v. CarySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
- Lambeth v. LambethSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- King v. Insurance Company of North AmericaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
- Pattillo v. PattilloSupreme Court of Alabama · 1982
- Smith v. North Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
- Heller v. HellerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969
- Mitchell, Brewer, Richardson, Adams, Burge & Boughman, Pllc v. BrewerNorth Carolina Business Court · 2007
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.