Legal Opinion

Kanoy v. Hinshaw

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 10, 1968No. 450PublishedCited by 43 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBranch, J.

Plaintiffs assign as error the trial court’s action in consolidating the two cases for trial. This assignment of error is based on an exception duly taken. Fleming v. Holleman, 190 N.C. 449, 130 S.E. 171.

Appellants rely on the language contained in the case of Dixon v. Brockwell, 227 N.C. 567, 42 S.E. 2d 680, where Winbome, J., (later C.J.) stated:

“It is appropriate to say that consideration of this appeal leads to the conclusion that it would be better to try the actions brought by these plaintiffs, passengers in the Frank N. Martin car, separately from the action brought by Frank N. Martin.…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Abbitt v. . GregorySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  2. In Re Will of HallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  3. Osborne v. . WilkesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
  4. Upchurch v. Hudson Funeral Home, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  5. Jenkins v. Leftwich Electric CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961

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

3Cited by43 opinions

  1. Johnson v. Ruark Obstetrics & Gynecology Associates, P.A.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1990
  2. Hairston v. Alexander Tank & Equipment Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
  3. Braswell v. BraswellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1991
  4. Wall v. StoutSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
  5. Azzolino v. DingfelderSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985

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

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

Powered by the Exa API