Hooks v. Hudson

75 S.E.2d 758, 237 N.C. 695, 1953 N.C. LEXIS 700
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided May 6, 1953·No. 598·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

*697 Wiktbornje, J.

Did the judge of Superior Court err in sustaining defendant’s demurrer to the complaint? This is the only question presented on this appeal.

In this connection, the controlling principles have been restated and applied in the recent cases of McLaney v. Motor Freight, Inc., 236 N.C. 714, 74 S.E. 2d 36, and Hollifield v. Everhart, ante, 313, 74 S.E. 2d 706. In each of these cases, similar in factual situation to the case in hand, the sufficiency of the allegations of the complaint to state a cause of action, was challenged by demurrer upon grounds similar to those on which defendant here relies. And what is said there is applicable here. Further restatement would be merely repetitious. Hence on authority of these cases, the judgment below is

Affirmed.

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

Hooks v. Hudson, 75 S.E.2d 758, 237 N.C. 695, 1953 N.C. LEXIS 700 (N.C. 1953).

75 S.E.2d 758 (Hooks v. Hudson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Howze v. McCall
106 S.E.2d 236 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1958)
Towe v. Stokes
117 F. Supp. 880 (M.D. North Carolina, 1954)
Smith v. Grubb
78 S.E.2d 598 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1953)