Munro v. Carolina Rubber Co.

153 S.E. 412, 198 N.C. 808, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 494
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided June 6, 1930·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Pee Cueiam.

The defendants demurred to the complaint. The court below overruled the demurrer. The defendant excepted, assigned error and appealed to the Supreme Court. We think the demurrer should have been overruled.

On a demurrer we consider only the sufficiency of the allegations set forth in the complaint. For the purpose of the demurrer the allegations are taken to be true. A demurrer cannot be sustained to a complaint if in any portion or to any extent it presents a cause of action, or if sufficient facts can be fairly gathered therefrom. On this aspect we think the demurrer should have been overruled. The judgment below is

Affirmed.

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

Munro v. Carolina Rubber Co., 153 S.E. 412, 198 N.C. 808, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 494 (N.C. 1930).

153 S.E. 412 (Munro v. Carolina Rubber Co.) — 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)