Legal Opinion

Motsinger v. . Hauser

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 18, 1928PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.

It is conceded that plaintiff’s cause of action is barred by the statute of limitations unless the identity of the present suit with one previously entered and nonsuited, in which no complaint was ever filed, can be shown by parol, so as to bring it under the saving provision of the statute allowing a plaintiff, upon payment of costs, to commence a new action within a year after such nonsuit in the original action. C. S., 415. In other words, as no complaint was filed in the first action, so as to enable the court to inspect it and thus determine its character, can the plaintiff show by parol…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Young v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1925

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Davis v. Norfolk Southern RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  2. Drinkwater v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  3. Ingle v. . CassadySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  4. Citizens Saving & Loan Co. v. WarrenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API