Atlantic Life Insurance v. Dey

174 S.E. 89, 206 N.C. 368, 1934 N.C. LEXIS 187
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedApril 11, 1934
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 174 S.E. 89 (Atlantic Life Insurance v. Dey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Atlantic Life Insurance v. Dey, 174 S.E. 89, 206 N.C. 368, 1934 N.C. LEXIS 187 (N.C. 1934).

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

Viewing the allegations of the complaint with the liberality which the law requires on demurrer, it would seem that the allegation of deficiency in payment with interest from date of foreclosure is sufficient to charge the maturity of the unpaid balance, and, if not otherwise alleged, the foreclosure was tantamount to demand for payment. Worth v. Stewart, 122 N. C., 258, 29 S. E., 579; 21 R. C. L., 119; 1 Abbott’s Forms of Pleading (3d), 338.

It is true, the complaint is little more than a skeleton (Thompson v. Johnson, 202 N. C., 817, 164 S. E., 357) — wholly devoid of redundancy — but considering it in its entirety, it would seem to be sufficient as against a demurrer. Meyer v. Fenner, 196 N. C., 476, 146 S. E., 82; Blackmore v. Winders, 144 N. C., 212, 56 S. E., 874.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Sossamon v. Oaklawn Cemetery, Inc.
193 S.E. 720 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1937)
Leach v. . Page
191 S.E. 349 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1937)
Citizens Bank of Marshall v. Gahagan
187 S.E. 580 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1936)
Fairbanks, Morse & Company, Inc. v. J. A. Murdock Co.
177 S.E. 122 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1934)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
174 S.E. 89, 206 N.C. 368, 1934 N.C. LEXIS 187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/atlantic-life-insurance-v-dey-nc-1934.