Trust Co. v. Currin

4 Citing cases

  1. Bouligny, Inc. v. Steelworkers

    270 N.C. 160 (N.C. 1967)   Cited 36 times
    Explaining that a corporation may "be injured in its credit, in its business good will, or in its relations with its employees ... its corporate nature is not a bar to its recovery of damages from the wrongdoer"

    For the purpose of determining the validity of the order from which this appeal is taken, we assume that the allegations of fact in the complaint, as distinguished from conclusions of law, are true. We also assume that the affirmative allegations of fact in the several further answers, as distinguished from conclusions of law and from denials of facts alleged in the complaint, are true. Trust Co. v. Currin, 244 N.C. 102, 92 S.E.2d 658. The questions for us are whether, on these assumptions, the allegations struck from the further answers constitute, or are germane to, a valid and sufficient defense to the cause of action, if any, alleged in the complaint. In search of the solution to those questions, we turn first to the law of this State and then to the Constitution and laws of the United States to ascertain what, if any, effect they have upon the law of North Carolina otherwise applicable.

  2. Parnell v. Insurance Co.

    263 N.C. 445 (N.C. 1965)   Cited 23 times
    Looking to the plaintiff

    In considering plaintiff's motion to strike (demurrer), the facts alleged by defendant are deemed admitted. Jenkins Co. v. Lewis, 259 N.C. 86, 88, 130 S.E.2d 49; Pack v. McCoy, 251 N.C. 590, 112 S.E.2d 118; Trust Co. v. Currin, 244 N.C. 102, 92 S.E.2d 658. "Every action must be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest . . ."

  3. Lumber Co. v. Hunt

    251 N.C. 624 (N.C. 1960)   Cited 29 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that although a person may be a shareholder or an officer of a corporation, that is not sufficient to establish privity for purposes of res judicata between the shareholder or officer and the corporation

    The demurrer and motion to strike defendant's pleas in bar present squarely for decision the sufficiency of such pleas, because the demurrer, for the purpose, admits the truth of factual averments well stated, and such relevant inferences as may be deduced therefrom, but not legal inferences or conclusions of law asserted by the pleader, McKinney v. High Point, 237 N.C. 66, 74 S.E.2d 440, and the motion to strike, for the purpose of the motion, makes similar admissions. Trust Co. v. Currin, 244 N.C. 102, 92 S.E.2d 658. On 10 November 1955, F.L. Taylor was operating a Cadillac auto, mobile, owned by the, plaintiff here, Troy Lumber Company, which was involved in a collision with an automobile driven by defendant E. M. Hunt. The present action is to recover property damage to the automobile allegedly caused by the actionable negligence of the defendant.

  4. Lyon v. May

    108 N.C. App. 633 (N.C. Ct. App. 1993)   Cited 5 times
    Dismissing abuse of process claim because although the "[p]laintiff was not entitled to attachment of the proceeds ... that does not change the fact that plaintiff used the attachment for its true purpose"

    Being named as the insured under the policy, defendant unquestionably can maintain an action against the insurance company as the named insured. Wachovia Bank Trust Co. v. Currin, 244 N.C. 102, 107, 92 S.E.2d 658, 662 (1956). Even though defendant's debt to FmHA exceeded the amount of the proceeds from the insurance company, that does not alter the fact that defendant had an enforceable right to force the payment of the proceeds.