Legal Opinion

Carolina Garage, Inc. v. Holston

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided March 20, 1979No. 7821SC432PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HEDRICK, Judge.

Defendant’s single assignment of error is as follows:

The Court’s denial of defendant’s Motion under North Carolina Rule of Civil Procedure 13(f) for leave to set up a counterclaim by amendment to the defendant’s Answer, on the grounds that the counterclaim was omitted from the Answer by oversight, inadvertence or excusable neglect and justice required the allowance of the Motion and the denial of the Motion was prejudicial to the defendant and demonstrated an abuse of discretion.

Rule 13(f) provides: “When a pleader fails to set up a counterclaim through oversight, inadvertence…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Roberts v. William N. & Kate B. Reynolds Mem. ParkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  2. Vernon v. CristSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
  3. Hudspeth v. BunzeyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
  4. Markham v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1972
  5. Galligan v. SmithCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1972

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Wilson v. McLeod Oil Co., Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1990
  2. Martin v. HareCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
  3. Smith v. McRarySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  4. Pressman v. University of North Carolina at CharlotteCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
  5. Nationsbank of North Carolina, N.A. v. BainesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994

12 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