Hall v. Queen City Coach Co.
This text of 32 S.E.2d 325 (Hall v. Queen City Coach Co.) 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.
Opinion
The court below was not dealing with the final issue, but merely with the question whether the temporary restraining order should be continued to the hearing. As the judge was not requested to find the facts in writing, and did not do so, under our practice it will be presumed that, for the purpose of his order, he found facts sufficient to support it. Therefore, we are unable to find grounds for reversal.
However, in this Court, counsel for I. E. Chandler demurred, ore tenus, to the complaint as not stating a cause of. action against him. Upon examination of the pleadings, we are of the opinion-that the demurrer should be sustained, and it is so ordered. The action as to Chandler is dismissed.
Except as thus modified, the judgment is
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
32 S.E.2d 325, 224 N.C. 781, 1944 N.C. LEXIS 245, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hall-v-queen-city-coach-co-nc-1944.