Legal Opinion

Sasser v. . Bullard

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 15, 1930PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Stacy, O. J.

That there is a misjoinder, both of parties and causes of action, is apparent on the face of the complaint, since 0. S., 2513, authorizes a suit by a married woman to recover damages for personal injuries without the joinder of her husband (Kirkpatrick v. Crutchfield, 178 N. C., 348, 100 S. E., 602), and the several causes of action, united in the present complaint, do not “affect all the parties to the action,” as required by C. S., 507.

Where this dual misjoinder occurs, as in the instant case, and a demurrer is accordingly interposed, the decisions are to the effect that the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Citizens National Bank v. Angelo Bros.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
  2. Roberts v. Utility Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
  3. Shore v. . HoltSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
  4. Thigpen v. Kinston Cotton MillsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
  5. Kirkpatrick v. . CrutchfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Smith v. Greensboro Joint Stock Land BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  2. Town of Wllkesboro v. JordanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  3. Lucas v. North Carolina Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
  4. Holland v. . WhittingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
  5. Moore County v. . BurnsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944

5 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