From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Petitions for Discretionary Review

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jan 1, 1997
346 N.C. 279 (N.C. 1997)

Summary

reasoning that the defendant was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries resulting from purchasing a damaged vehicle because she "purchased th[e] car based on the assurances of defendant . . . and would not have purchased the car had she known it was a reconstructed vehicle"

Summary of this case from Hongda Chem. U.S., LLC v. Shangyu Sunfit Chem. Co.

Opinion

1997


Summaries of

Petitions for Discretionary Review

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jan 1, 1997
346 N.C. 279 (N.C. 1997)

reasoning that the defendant was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries resulting from purchasing a damaged vehicle because she "purchased th[e] car based on the assurances of defendant . . . and would not have purchased the car had she known it was a reconstructed vehicle"

Summary of this case from Hongda Chem. U.S., LLC v. Shangyu Sunfit Chem. Co.
Case details for

Petitions for Discretionary Review

Case Details

Full title:PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Jan 1, 1997

Citations

346 N.C. 279 (N.C. 1997)

Citing Cases

Wood v. BD&A Construction, L.L.C.

As there are no allegations as to how plaintiffs' reliance on the particular representations regarding the…

Wilkins v. Safran

We agree.           N.C. Gen.Stat. § 84-13 (2005) provides, “[i]f any attorney commits any fraudulent…