Morton G. Thalhimer, Inc. v. Abrams

59 S.E.2d 358, 232 N.C. 96, 1950 N.C. LEXIS 407
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided May 10, 1950·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Pee Curiam.

While it appears from careful reading and consideration of the matters set up in defendant’s further defense that there are averments of fraud, it is manifest that these averments are insufficient to state a cause of action against plaintiff for actionable fraud. And what the effect of the averments is in respect of the lessees and their assignee is a matter foreign to the issue between plaintiff and defendant. Hence in the order striking the further defense, no error is made to appear.

Affirmed.

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

Morton G. Thalhimer, Inc. v. Abrams, 59 S.E.2d 358, 232 N.C. 96, 1950 N.C. LEXIS 407 (N.C. 1950).

59 S.E.2d 358 (Morton G. Thalhimer, Inc. v. Abrams) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

MILNER HOTELS, INCORPORATED v. City of Raleigh
155 S.E.2d 543 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1967)
Miller v. First National Bank
67 S.E.2d 362 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1951)
Miller v. First National Bank of Catawba County
67 S.E.2d 362 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1951)