Legal Opinion

Armstrong v. Aetna Insurance Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 14, 1959No. 596PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBobbitt, J.

Decision herein depends upon the legal significance of what occurred in plaintiff’s prior action against the Construction Company.

The clerk’s ex parte order of attachment was properly issued under G.S. 1-440.12 if plaintiff’s verified complaint and bond for attachment met the requirements of G.S. 1-440.11 and G.S. 1-440.10, respectively.

The Construction Company, by answer (1) denied all allegations on which plaintiff based his alleged right of attachment and (2) moved to vacate the clerk’s ex parte order of attachment. It thereby challenged the legal sufficiency of plaintiff’s verified…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Spruill v. NixonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  2. Rushing v. . AshcraftSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Bunn v. BunnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  2. Hemric v. GroceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
  3. Nettie S. Crowe and Meletia S. Sneed v. Cherokee Wonderland, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1967
  4. Ferrell v. North Carolina State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  5. Britt v. BrittCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978

3 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