Legal Opinion

Caldwell v. Deese

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided July 2, 1975No. 7526SC254PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HEDRICK, Judge.

The sole question for resolution on this appeal is whether the trial court erred in allowing defendant’s motion for summary judgment.

*438Although the trial judge in entering summary judgment for the defendant declared in the language of Rule 56 that there were no genuine issues of material fact, the findings made by him (findings being unnecessary in passing on a motion for summary judgment, Wall v. Wall, 24 N.C. App. 725, 212 S.E. 2d 238 (1975), cert. denied 287 N.C. 264, 214 S.E. 2d 437 (1975)) indicate that the court felt that the plaintiff’s complaint failed to state a claim…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Sutton v. DukeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  2. Whitley v. CubberlyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974
  3. Tolbert v. GREAT ATLANTIC AND PACIFIC TEA CO., INC.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974
  4. Wall v. WallCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1975
  5. Sanders v. DavisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1975

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Gallimore v. SinkCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1975
  2. Ingram v. KerrCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1995
  3. Siders v. GibbsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976
  4. Caldwell v. DeeseCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1975

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

Powered by the Exa API