Legal Opinion

Preister v. Stanly Bank & Trust Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 16, 1936PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDevin, J.

It is an elementary rule of procedure, upheld by many decisions of this Court, that when the answer sets up a plea in complete bar of plaintiff’s action, a compulsory reference should not be ordered until the plea, which may defeat the action entirely and render an accounting useless, has been determined. McIntosh Prac. & Proc., sec. 523; Smith v. Goldsboro, 121 N. C., 350; R. R. v. Morrison, 82 N. C., 141.

What constitutes a plea in bar has been considered and accurately defined by this Court in Bank v. Evans, 191 N. C., 538, as follows: “In a legal sense it is a plea or peremptory exception…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Jones v. . BeamanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1895
  2. Smith v. City of GoldsboroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
  3. Murchison National Bank v. EvansSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  4. Commissioners of Iredell County v. WhiteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
  5. State Ex Rel. Haywood County v. WelchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Solon Lodge No. 9 Knights of Pythias Co. v. Ionic Lodge Free Ancient & Accepted Masons No. 72 Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  2. Industrial Lithographic Co. v. MillsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
  3. Cheshire v. First Presbyterian ChurchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  4. Leach v. QuinnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
  5. Leach v. . QuinnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API