Legal Opinion

Durham v. . Laird

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 21, 1930No. Docket 14406; Docket 14407PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBbogdeN, J.

The sole question of law presented by this appeal is whether the trial judge had the power in his discretion to refuse to consolidate the actions.

The cause discloses substantially the following fact setting: A plaintiff brings two suits on the same day, against the same defendants for damages growing out of an automobile collision. In one suit the plaintiff seeks to recover damages for personal injury, and in the other suit compensation for property damage growing out of said collision. The defendants, among other things, plead the pendency of each suit as a bar to the other, and the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Underwood v. . DooleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
  2. Fleming v. HollemanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  3. Fleming v. . HollemanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  4. Wilder v. . GreeneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
  5. Blount v. . SawyerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Abbitt v. . GregorySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  2. Phelps v. McCotterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  3. Peeples v. Seaboard Air Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  4. Blue v. BhiroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2022
  5. Blue v. BhiroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2022

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

Powered by the Exa API