1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. S.E.2d
  4. 74 S.E.2d
  5. 74 S.E.2d 653 (1953)
 

LEDFORD v. MARION TRANSP. CO.

No. 166.

74 S.E.2d 653 (1953)

237 N.C. 317

LEDFORD v. MARION TRANSP. CO.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 4, 1953.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Everette C. Carnes, Marion, for defendant, appellant.

Proctor & Dameron, Marion, and Hamrick & Jones, Rutherfordton, for plaintiff, appellee.

DENNY, Justice.

No useful purpose would be served by setting out in detail the specific allegations of the complaint challenged by the motion to strike. However, if it be conceded that the complaint is not as concise and devoid of repetition as it might be in stating the plaintiff's cause of action, we can see nothing in it that will be harmful or prejudicial to defendant's rights.

In Hinson v. Britt, 232 N.C. 379,

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases