WISE v. VINCENT

No. 357.

144 S.E.2d 877 (1965)

265 N.C. 647

Mrs. Lydia S. WISE, Plaintiff, v. Arthur Hoyle VINCENT, Original Defendant, and Queen City Coach Company, Carl Jerry Ball and Warren Charles Jones, Additional Defendants. Mrs. Lydia L. STRONACH, Plaintiff, v. Arthur Hoyle VINCENT, Original Defendant, and Queen City Coach Company, Carl Jerry Ball and Warren Charles Jones, Additional Defendants.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 24, 1965.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Fouts & Watson, Burnsville, for original defendant, appellee.

Uzzell & Dumont, Asheville, for additional defendant, appellant.


MOORE, Justice.

The first question raised is whether original defendant Vincent states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action for contribution against additional defendant Jones.

The applicable rules of law are stated in Hayes v. City of Wilmington, 243 N.C. 525, 91 S.E.2d 673, as follows:

"1. Liability for contribution under the provisions of G.S. § 1-240 may not be...

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