Mullen v. Norfolk & North Carolina Canal Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
At the Fall Term, 1892, of CajxdeN Superior Court, before Hoke, /., the defendant entered special appearance and moved to dismiss the action on the ground that the affidavit on which order of publication was based was defective. The Court refused the motion and allowed the plaintiff to amend his affidavit and granted an alias order of publication. Defendant appealed.
1Opinion of the Court
Claiik, J.:
The defendant, appearing by counsel who entered a special appearance, moved to dismiss the action. This motion was refused and the defendant did not enter its exception and proceed to answer, but at once appealed. It has been often pointed out that such an appeal is premature and will be dismissed. Guilford v. Georgia Co., 109 N. C., 310; Sheldon v. Kivett, 110 N. C., 408, and other cases which are cited in Clark’s Code (2d Ed.), p. 559. If a defendant, by simply appearing specialty and moving to dismiss the action upon the allegation of defective service, or on any other ground,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Guilford v. . Georgia Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
- Price v. . CoxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1880
- Sheldon v. . KivettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892
- Branch v. . FrankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1879
- Sinclair v. Western North Carolina RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892
3Cited by6 opinions
- Best v. British & American Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1901
- Mullen v. Norfolk & Carolina Canal Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1894
- Belk's Department Store, Inc. v. . Guilford CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
- Bullock v. . BullockSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1832
- Houston v. Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.