Legal Opinion

Martin v. . Young

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 5, 1881PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Civil Action tried at Spring Term, 1881, of Mecklen-burg Superior Court, before Eure, L A single point is presented in this case and to enable it .to be understood, a very succinct statement of the facts will .•suffice. , In their answer the defendants deny having made any «contract with the plaintiff individually, but say .they did «contract with a firm composed of the plaintiff and J. and 33. Stowe* and set up a counterclaim against the said firm.

Read the full summary

Civil Action tried at Spring Term, 1881, of Mecklen-burg Superior Court, before Eure, L A single point is presented in this case and to enable it .to be understood, a very succinct statement of the facts will .•suffice. , In their answer the defendants deny having made any «contract with the plaintiff individually, but say .they did «contract with a firm composed of the plaintiff and J. and 33. Stowe* and set up a counterclaim against the said firm. To this the plaintiff replied that the contract su'ed on was-made with himself and not the firm, and he pleaded statute of limitations-to the…

1Opinion of the Court

Ruffin, J.,

after stating the facts. It is insisted for the defendants that by law no amendment is permitted to be made, the effect of which can be to take away a defence that might be made to the action if begun at the time of the amendment asked for, Phillips v. Holland, 79 N. C., 31, and Henderson v. Graham, 59 N. C., 496. And again, that when by an.amendment a new charge is introduced against the defendant,.he.make such, defence to. as. .if it...w.ere the, foun- •datiou of an .action then newly begun, Christmas v. Mitchell, 3 Ired. Eq., 535.

Conceding both of these propositions to he true,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Cogdell, Assignee v. . ExumSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1873
  2. Harrell v. . PeeblesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1878

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Union Pacific Railway Co. v. WylerSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
  2. Motsenbocker v. Shawnee Gas & Electric Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
  3. Whetstine v. WilsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
  4. Midland Steel Co. v. Citizens National BankIndiana Court of Appeals · 1901
  5. Battery Park Bank v. LoughranSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898

3 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