T. A. LOVING COMPANY v. LATHAM

No. 7215SC144.

190 S.E.2d 248 (1972)

15 N.C. App. 441

T. A. LOVING COMPANY v. James F. LATHAM et al.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

August 2, 1972.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Latham, Pickard & Ennis by Spencer Ennis, and Dalton & Long by W. R. Dalton, Jr., Burlington, for original defendants, appellants.

Sanders, Holt & Spencer, by James C. Spencer, Jr., Burlington, for additional defendants, Owen Steel Company, Inc., and A. B. Whitley, Inc., appellees.

Wardlow, Knox, Caudle & Knox by Lloyd C. Caudle, Charlotte, for additional defendants, Rayson Company and Florida Steel Company, Inc., appellees.

Robert N. Robinson, Charlotte, for additional defendant, General Specialties Co., Inc., appellee.

Yarborough, Blanchard, Tucker & Denson by Irvin B. Tucker, Jr., Raleigh, for additional defendant, Partitions, Inc., appellee.

Haywood, Denny & Miller by Emery B. Denny, Jr., Chapel Hill, for additional defendants, James A. Smith & Son, and S. H. Basnight & Sons, appellees.

Brown, Brown & Brown by R. L. Brown, Jr., Albemarle, for additional defendant, Overdoors of the Carolinas, Inc., appellee.

Taylor, Allen, Warren & Kerr by W. Frank Taylor, Goldsboro, for additional defendants, W. H. Best & Sons, Inc., and Dewey Bros., Inc., appellees.

Adams, Kleemeier, Hagan, Hannah & Fouts by Clinton Eudy, Jr., Greensboro, for additional defendant, W. H. Sullivan Co., appellee.

Allen, Allen & Sternberg, by Louis C. Allen, Jr., Burlington, for additional defendants, Richard A. Robertson t/a Richard A. Robertson, Masonry Contractor, and Overman Cabinet and Supply Co., appellees.

Falk, Carruthers & Roth by Herbert S. Falk, Jr., Greensboro, for additional defendant, Greensboro Concrete & Construction Co., Inc., appellee.


PARKER, Judge.

Appellants contend they are entitled to have the disclaimers of appellees made "irrevocable, permanent, and binding," and that the order appealed from does not have this effect. They reason that the order is in favor of appellees, not against them, and from this somehow arrive at the conclusion that appellees are left free in the future to assert possible claims against them. We agree neither with appellants' reasoning nor with their conclusion.

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