From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brooks Distributing Co. v. Pugh

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Apr 1, 1989
324 N.C. 326 (N.C. 1989)

Summary

adopting Justice Cozart's dissenting opinion from Court of Appeals

Summary of this case from Walter v. Freeway Foods, Inc. (In re Freeway Foods of Greensboro, Inc.)

Opinion

No. 560A88

Filed 5 April 1989

APPEAL by plaintiff from a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 91 N.C. App. 715, 373 S.E.2d 300 (1988), which affirmed in part and reversed in part a judgment of superior court entered 22 September 1988. Heard in the Supreme Court 14 March 1989.

Maxwell, Martin, Freeman and Beason, by James B. Maxwell and John C. Martin, for plaintiff appellant.

Haywood, Denny, Miller, Johnson, Sessoms and Patrick by George W. Miller, Jr. and E. Elizabeth Lefler, for defendant appellees.


For the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion of Cozort, J., the decision of the Court of Appeals as to the defendant Helton is reversed. The case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for further remand to the Superior Court of Durham County.

Reversed and remanded.


Summaries of

Brooks Distributing Co. v. Pugh

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Apr 1, 1989
324 N.C. 326 (N.C. 1989)

adopting Justice Cozart's dissenting opinion from Court of Appeals

Summary of this case from Walter v. Freeway Foods, Inc. (In re Freeway Foods of Greensboro, Inc.)

adopting dissenting opinion from Court of Appeals holding the statement of consideration furnished by employer was not necessary where employer was seeking to enforce covenant not to compete

Summary of this case from East Camp, L.L.C. v. Spruill
Case details for

Brooks Distributing Co. v. Pugh

Case Details

Full title:BROOKS DISTRIBUTING COMPANY, INC., PLAINTIFF v. JEFFREY PUGH, DEFENDANT…

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Apr 1, 1989

Citations

324 N.C. 326 (N.C. 1989)
378 S.E.2d 31

Citing Cases

Jones v. Brock & Scott, PLLC

whether collateral estoppel bars Plaintiffs' claims because it "is an affirmative defense that can only be…

Walter v. Freeway Foods, Inc. (In re Freeway Foods of Greensboro, Inc.)

As a general rule, the Statute of Frauds cannot be utilized to demonstrate the invalidity of a contract on a…