Cooke v. Outland
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtPabKER, J.
Plaintiff assigns as errors Judge Bundy’s three conclusions of law and the signing of the judgment.
Plaintiff bases his action in the nature of mandamus to enforce his rights as “a qualified shareholder” in the Bank of Rich Square to examine the books and records of account of the Bank of Rich Square upon the provisions of G.S. 55-38 (a) and (b). He bases that part of his action seeking to recover from the individual defendants $500 as a penalty for their refusing to allow him, pursuant to his written demand, to make such an examination of the books and records of account of the Bank of Rich…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Matter of SteinwayNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- Guthrie v. HarknessSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Rosentool v. Bonanza Oil and Mine Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1960
- Commonwealth ex rel. Sellers v. Phœnix Iron Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1884
- Goldman v. Trans-United Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Bank of Heflin v. MilesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1975
- Hales v. North Carolina Insurance Guaranty Ass'nSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1994
- Parsons v. Jefferson-Pilot Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1993
- Carter v. Wilson Const. Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
- Pederson v. Arctic Slope Regional Corp.Alaska Supreme Court · 2014
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.