Rogers v. . Banzet

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Rogers v. . Banzet

165 S.E. 358, 203 N.C. 217, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 354

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedSeptember 21, 1932

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 165 S.E. 358 (Rogers v. . Banzet) 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

Rogers v. . Banzet, 165 S.E. 358, 203 N.C. 217, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 354 (N.C. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The purpose of the action is to impress a resulting trust upon certain property and to recover an amount alleged to be due the plaintiff. The appellants demurred to the complaint on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, since it states a loan but does not set forth a trust upon the land or its proceeds. The court overruled the demurrer.

The allegations in the complaint, which the appellants admit by filing the demurrer, precludes dismissal of the action. Judgment

Affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

The purpose of the action is to impress a resulting trust upon certain property and to recover an amount alleged to be due the plaintiff. The appellants demurred to the complaint on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, since it states a loan but does not set forth a trust upon the land or its proceeds. The court overruled the demurrer.

The allegations in the complaint, which the appellants admit by filing the demurrer, precludes dismissal of the action. Judgment

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

165 S.E. 358, 203 N.C. 217, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 354, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rogers-v-banzet-nc-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack