Pierce Concrete, Inc. v. Cannon Realty & Construction Co.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
EAGLES, Judge.
The question presented is whether summary judgment was appropriate, i.e., was there a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the unpaid account constituted an indebtedness of the suspended corporation or an individual indebtedness of Clayton Cannon. On this record we conclude that the trial court was correct in allowing summary judgment against Clayton Cannon personally for the amount of the account.
I
The purpose of summary judgment is to prevent unnecessary trials when there are no genuine issues of fact and the defenses are frivolous, and to separate any issues that are…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Kidd v. EarlySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
- Meiselman v. MeiselmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- Nasco Equipment Co. v. MasonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
- Burlington Industries, Inc. v. FoilSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
- Whitten v. Bob King's AMC/Jeep, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Ehrenhaus v. BakerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2011
- Seraph Garrison, LLC v. GarrisonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016
- Battleground Veterinary Hosp., P.C. v. McGeoughâNorth Carolina Business Court · 2007
- Morgan v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1998
- Aecom Tech. Corp. v. KeatingNorth Carolina Business Court · 2012
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.