Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Distributing Corp. v. Maxwell

209 N.C. 47
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedDecember 11, 1935
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 209 N.C. 47 (Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Distributing Corp. v. Maxwell) 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
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Distributing Corp. v. Maxwell, 209 N.C. 47 (N.C. 1935).

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

It appears on tbe face of tbe complaint tbat tbe tax in question was levied and collected under tbe Eevenue Act of 1933; tbat plaintiff did not observe tbe statutory method provided for testing tbe validity of any tax paid thereunder; and tbat tbe allegation of payment under compulsion is a mere conclusion of tbe pleader unsupported by tbe facts. This renders tbe complaint bad as against a demurrer. Bunn v. Maxwell, 199 N. C., 557, 155 S. E., 250; Mfg. Co. v. Comrs. of Pender, 196 N. C., 744, 147 S. E., 284; Rotan v. State, 195 N. C., 291, 141 S. E., 733; Maxwell v. Hinsdale, 207 N. C., 37, 175 S. E., 847.

Tbe demurrer admits facts properly pleaded, but not inferences or conclusions of law. Phifer v. Berry, 202 N. C., 388, 163 S. E., 119. Tbe action was properly dismissed.

Affirmed.

Devin, J., took no part in tbe consideration or decision of this ease.

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

Related

Cox v. Pitt County Transportation Company
129 S.E.2d 589 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1963)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
209 N.C. 47, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/metro-goldwyn-mayer-distributing-corp-v-maxwell-nc-1935.