Legal Opinion
Bailey v. McGill
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided December 11, 1957No. 175PublishedCited by 38 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtParker, J.
As the defendants’ demurrer ore tenus challenges plaintiff’s complaint on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, it is necessary to summarize its essential allegations, which are as follows:
Plaintiff is a citizen and resident of Cleveland County, North Carolina. Dr. John C. McGill and Dr. Kenneth H. McGill are, and were at the times complained of, practicing physicians in Kings Mountain, North Carolina. Dr. Thomas H. Wright, Jr. is, and was at the times complained of, a practicing psychiatrist in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Prior to 15 October 1954,…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- Barnette v. WoodySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- Mezullo v. MaletzMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1954
- Jarman v. OffuttSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
- Ramsey v. . CheekSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
- McKinney v. City of High PointSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- Sutton v. DukeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
- Harris v. NCNB National Bank of North CarolinaCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
- Peter L. Johnson v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1976
- Holmes v. EddyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1965
- Houpe v. City of StatesvilleCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1998
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.