Legal Opinion

Crawford v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided December 18, 1979No. 7927SC318PublishedCited by 6 opinions

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

  1. Wiles v. Welparnel Const. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
  2. Hogsed v. . PearlmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  3. Jones v. . VanstorySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  4. Hall v. LassiterCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
  5. McLean v. MathenySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Tyson v. L'Eggs Products, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
  2. Paramore v. Inter-Regional Financial Group Leasing Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
  3. Harris v. MareadyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
  4. Crawford v. Aetna Casualty & Surety CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  5. 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.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API