Legal Opinion

Andrews Ex Rel. Andrews v. Seaboard Air Line Railway Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 18, 1931PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per CueiaM.

The demurrer filed by the defendant admits the relevant facts set out in the complaint and such relevant inferences of fact as may be deducible therefrom, but it does not admit conclusions or inferences of law. Yarborough v. Park Commission, 196 N. C., 284; Ballinger v. Thomas, 195 N. C., 517.

We are of opinion that the complaint, examined in the light of this rule, does not set forth the breach of any duty the defendant owed the plaintiff. Bailey v. R. R., 149 N. C., 169; Monroe v. R. R., 151 N. C., 374; Brigman v. Construction Co., 192 N. C., 791. Reference to the place of the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ballinger v. . ThomasSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
  2. Yarborough v. North Carolina Park CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
  3. Bailey v. North Carolina R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
  4. Monroe v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Baker v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  2. Cotton Mills v. . Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  3. Gentry v. Town of Hot SpringsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
  4. Weiner v. Equel's Style Shop, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
  5. Jessup v. High Point, Thomasville & Denton RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956

9 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