Bank v. . Moseley

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Bank v. . Moseley

162 S.E. 924, 202 N.C. 836, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 259

DecidedMarch 9, 1932

StatusPublished

This text of 162 S.E. 924 (Bank v. . Moseley) 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

Bank v. . Moseley, 162 S.E. 924, 202 N.C. 836, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 259 (N.C. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Civil action (1) to recover on two promissory notes, and (2) to set aside a deed alleged to have been executed by the defendants in fraud of the plaintiff's rights.

Demurrer interposed on the ground of misjoinder of parties and causes. Overruled; exception; appeal. *Page 837 Affirmed on authority of Carswell v. Talley, 192 N.C. 37,135 S.E. 181, Robinson v. Williams, 189 N.C. 256, 126 S.E. 621,Chemical Co. v. Floyd, 158 N.C. 455, 74 S.E. 465, LeDuc v. Brandt,110 N.C. 289, 14 S.E. 778.

Affirmed.

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

Civil action (1) to recover on two promissory notes, and (2) to set aside a deed alleged to have been executed by the defendants in fraud of the plaintiff's rights.

Demurrer interposed on the ground of misjoinder of parties and causes. Overruled; exception; appeal. *Page 837 Affirmed on authority of Carswell v. Talley, 192 N.C. 37,135 S.E. 181, Robinson v. Williams, 189 N.C. 256, 126 S.E. 621,Chemical Co. v. Floyd, 158 N.C. 455, 74 S.E. 465, LeDuc v. Brandt,110 N.C. 289, 14 S.E. 778.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

162 S.E. 924, 202 N.C. 836, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 259, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bank-v-moseley-nc-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack