Cameron v. . Bennett
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Motion by plaintiff for judgment upon the pleadings, heard at February Term, 1892, of Riohmond Superior Court, Boykin, J., presiding. The motion was refused, and the plaintiff appealed.
1Opinion of the Court
Clark, J.:
Complaint and answer having been filed, the record states, “ Motion for judgment refused; motion denied; appeal by plaintiff.” No judgment having been rendered, no appeal lies. Taylor v. Bostic, 93 N. C., 415; Baum v. Shooting Club, 94 N. C., 217; State v. Hazell, 95 N. C., 623; State v. Divine, 98 N. C., 778.
Besides, a counter-claim is in the nature of a cross-action, and the motion for judgment upon the pleadings was in the nature of a motion to dismiss the cross-action. It is settled that an appeal does not lie from the refusal of a motion to dismiss ah action. Mitchell v.…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Plemmons v. Southern Improvement Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
- Walker v. . ScottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
- State v. . DivineSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1887
- McBryde v. . PattersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1878
- Mitchell v. . KilburnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1876
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Erickson v. StarlingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
- State Ex Rel. Corporation Commission v. Cannon Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
- Penn-Allen Cement Co. v. PhillipsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
- Duffy v. Meadows.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1902
- Duffy v. . HartsfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1920
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.