Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1999–2017 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by North Carolina courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Roper v. Edwardsgreen2 sentences2016Co. v. Kale-Barnwell Realty & Const. Co., 267 N.C. 714 , 719, 148 S.E.2d 856 , 860 (1966) (citation omitted); see also Roper v. Edwards, 323 N.C. 461 , 465, 373 S.E.2d 423 , 425 (1988) (stating that the existence of fraud need not be established if the facts of the case necessitate imposition of a constructive trust). 2016Co. v. Kale-Barnwell Realty & Const. Co., 267 N.C. 714 , 719, 148 S.E.2d 856 , 860 (1966) (citation omitted); see also Roper v. Edwards, 323 N.C. 461 , 465, 373 S.E.2d 423 , 425 (1988) (stating that the existence of fraud need not be established if the facts of the case necessitate imposition of a constructive trust). | 1 | 1 |
Lamb v. Lambgreen1 sentence1999See Lamb, 92 N.C. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Variety Wholesalers, Inc. v. Salem Logistics Traffic Services, LLC
green
2 sentences2017As to Movants’ contention that the constructive trust claim fails because there is no allegation of a relationship of trust or confidence, it is well-settled that “a fiduciary relationship, while generally the basis for constructive trust claims, is not strictly required.” Variety Wholesalers, Inc., 365 N.C. at 530 , 723 S.E2d at 752. 2015Ct. App. 2014) (“Indeed, the Supreme Court’s application of the constructive trust doctrine in Variety Wholesalers establishes that actual wrongdoing, such as fraud or breach of fiduciary duty, is not necessary for imposition of a constructive trust.”) After fact finding regarding the underlying events in this case, “the ultimate decision whether to impose a constructive trust as an equitable remedy would rest in the discretion of the trial court.” Variety Wholesalers, 365 N.C. at 531 , 723 S.E.2d at 752 . | 3 | 2014–2017 |
Stratton v. Royal Bank of Canada
green
1 sentence2017Stratton, 211 N.C. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Houston v. Tillman
green
1 sentence2017A trial court may impose a constructive trust on “the showing of either (1) some other circumstance making it inequitable for the defendant to retain the funds against the claim of the beneficiary of the constructive trust, or (2) that the defendant acquired the funds in an unconscientious manner.” Houston v. Tillman, 234 N.C. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Colwell Electric Co. v. Kale-Barnwell Realty & Construction Co.
green
2 sentences2016Co. v. Kale-Barnwell Realty & Const. Co., 267 N.C. 714 , 719, 148 S.E.2d 856 , 860 (1966) (citation omitted); see also Roper v. Edwards, 323 N.C. 461 , 465, 373 S.E.2d 423 , 425 (1988) (stating that the existence of fraud need not be established if the facts of the case necessitate imposition of a constructive trust). 2016Co. v. Kale-Barnwell Realty & Const. Co., 267 N.C. 714 , 719, 148 S.E.2d 856 , 860 (1966) (citation omitted); see also Roper v. Edwards, 323 N.C. 461 , 465, 373 S.E.2d 423 , 425 (1988) (stating that the existence of fraud need not be established if the facts of the case necessitate imposition of a constructive trust). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Sara Lee Corp. v. Carter
green
2 sentences2014Although defendants cite Variety Wholesalers and Sara Lee Corp. v. Carter, 351 N.C. 27 , 519 S.E.2d 308 (1999), in support of their claim that “some other circumstance” and “unconscientious manner” are synonymous with “wrongdoing,” defendants have not pointed to any language in either case to support their contention. 2 Indeed, the Supreme Court’s application of the constructive trust doctrine in Variety Wholesalers establishes that actual wrongdoing, such as fraud or breach of fiduciary duty, is not necessary for imposition of a constructive trust. 2014Although defendants cite Variety Wholesalers and Sara Lee Corp. v. Carter, 351 N.C. 27 , 519 S.E.2d 308 (1999), in support of their claim that “some other circumstance” and “unconscientious manner” are synonymous with “wrongdoing,” defendants have not pointed to any language in either case to support their contention. 2 Indeed, the Supreme Court’s application of the constructive trust doctrine in Variety Wholesalers establishes that actual wrongdoing, such as fraud or breach of fiduciary duty, is not necessary for imposition of a constructive trust. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Wilson v. Crab Orchard Development Company
green
1 sentence2008Plaintiff’s basis for a constructive trust claim is the latter, “some other circumstance.” Id. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.