Michigan National Bank v. Hanner
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBranch, J.
The sole question presented by this appeal is: Did the court err in striking from defendant’s amended answer the “further answer and counterclaim”?
In allowing the motion to strike from the amended answer the defendant’s “further answer and counterclaim” the trial judge found, inter alia, “that a similar further answer and counterclaim in almost identical language was heretofore stricken by order of Honorable James H. Pou Bailey at the July 1965 Regular Civil Session, Wake Superior Court.”
The power of one judge of the superior court is equal to and coordinate with that of another, and a judge…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. WeinrichMissouri Court of Appeals · 1924
- Ripple v. Mortgage & Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
- Doster v. . EnglishSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
- Yarborough v. Hughes.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
- Preyer v. ParkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- North Carolina National Bank v. Virginia Carolina BuildersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- State v. JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- State v. WoolridgeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2003
- State v. NeasSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- State v. PakulskiSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1990
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.