Crawford v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
VAUGHN, Judge.
Ex-Cell-0 Corporation was not served with sufficient legal process and the court did not, therefore, have jurisdiction over that particular entity. The trial court erred in denying Ex-Cell-O’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure. G.S. 1A-1, Rule 12(b)(2)(4)(5). Ex-Cell-0 was not made a party to the action commenced by plaintiff.
In Wiles v. Construction Co., 295 N.C. 81, 243 S.E. 2d 756 (1978), the Supreme Court, in overruling a long line of its cases, held that where the direction of the summons is to the corporation’s…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Wiles v. Welparnel Const. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
- Hogsed v. . PearlmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
- Jones v. . VanstorySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
- Hall v. LassiterCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
- McLean v. MathenySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Tyson v. L'Eggs Products, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
- Paramore v. Inter-Regional Financial Group Leasing Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
- Harris v. MareadyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
- Crawford v. Aetna Casualty & Surety CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
- Goodwin, by and Through Hales v. Four County Electric Care Trust, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.