1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. S.E.2d
  4. 352 S.E.2d
  5. 352 S.E.2d 247 (1987)
 

HARSHAW v. MUSTAFA

No. 8618SC668.

352 S.E.2d 247 (1987)

Doris HARSHAW dba Harshaw Bonding Company and Jo Wilkins dba Jo Wilkins Bonding Company, Plaintiffs, v. Hussain Mussallam MUSTAFA, Defendant, John Essa and Nabil Hanhan, Individually and doing business as Sultana Investments, a Partnership, Intervenor Defendants.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

February 3, 1987.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Hatfield and Hatfield by John B. Hatfield, Jr., and Peggy Kusenberg, Greensboro, for plaintiffs-appellees.

Benjamin D. Haines, Greensboro, for intervenor defendants-appellants.

WELLS, Judge.

Intervenor defendants present two questions for review: whether the court erred in denying their Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss and their Rule 60(b) motion to vacate judgment. However, the linchpin of both arguments as presented by Sultana is the same: that plaintiffs filed this action before their right against Mustafa accrued. We shall therefore begin our discussion by addressing this issue.

When defendant Mustafa failed to appear at the trial...

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