Legal Opinion

Revels v. Oxendine

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 15, 1965PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtHiggiNS, J.

At the threshold of this case we are confronted with a question of law not discussed or alluded to by either party but which appears upon the face of the record — the incapacity of the plaintiff committee to bring this action. Hence it becomes our duty ex mero motu to take notice of the defect. “If a court finds at any stage of the proceedings it is without jurisdiction, it is its duty to take notice of the defect and stay, quash or dismiss the suit. . . . ‘So, ex necessitate the court may, on plea, suggestion, motion, or ex mero motu,. where the defect of jurisdiction is apparent, stop the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Burgess Ex Rel. Burgess v. GibbsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  2. Fields Ex Rel. Fields v. Durham City Board of EducationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. In re: Custodial L. Enforcement Agency RecordingCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API