Legal Opinion

Dillon v. . Cotton Mills

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 31, 1924PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

From the facts properly presented it appears that the Bear Skin Cotton Mills, having become involved, an action was instituted to liquidate and distribute its assets in accordance with law, in which said action plaintiff, T. P. Dillon, was duly appointed receiver with authority and directions to sell the plant, etc.

Acting under said powers, the plaintiff has contracted to sell said plant — mills and some outlying property — to defendant at the price of $122,350, stipulating for the making of a good title, which said bid was duly reported to the court and confirmed at May Term, 1924, and title…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Witty v. WittySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
  2. Cameron v. Hicks.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  3. Everett v. . NewtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1896
  4. Taylor v. . EatmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
  5. Foil v. Newsome.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Hall v. . WardwellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  2. First Union National Bank v. BroyhillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  3. FIRST UNION NAT. BANK OF NC v. BroyhillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964

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

Powered by the Exa API