Legal Opinion

Roebuck v. . Short

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 26, 1928PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCoNNOR, J.

After the jury had been empaneled to try the issues arising on the pleadings in this action, and after the pleadings had been read, defendant demurred ore tenus to the complaint, for that upon its face the court was without jurisdiction of the subject-matter of the action. C. S., 511, sec. 1, and C. S., 518. Decision'of the question thus presented was reversed, and plaintiff proceeded to offer evidence. Before plaintiff had rested the court announced its opinion that the action is founded on contract, and that as the sum demanded in the complaint was less than two hundred dollars, to wit, one…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Higgs-Taft Furniture Co. v. ClarkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  2. Mitchem v. . PasourSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Four County Agricultural Credit Corp. v. SatterfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  2. Turnage Co. v. MortonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  3. Southerland v. . HarrellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  4. Coble v. ReapSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967

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

Powered by the Exa API