Swift and Company v. Dan-Cleve Corp.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
ARNOLD, Judge.
The question presented by this appeal is whether the trial court’s findings of fact support its conclusion that defendants impliedly waived their motion for venue change as a matter of right.
Venue is not jurisdictional. It may bé waived “unless the defendant, before the time of answering expires, demands in writing that the trial be conducted in the proper county. . . .” G.S; 1-83. See Nelms v. Nelms, 250 N.C. 237, 108 S.E. 2d 529 (1959) ; Roberts v. Moore, 185 N.C. 254, 116 S.E. 728 (1923). Under G.S. 1A-1, Rule 12(b) (3), the defense of improper venue may be raised in the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Nello L. Teer Co. v. Hitchcock Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
- Wynne v. . ConradSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
- Wynne v. ConradSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
- Mitchell v. JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
- Roberts & Hoge, Inc. v. MooreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Miller v. MillerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
- Lendingtree, LLC v. AndersonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2013
- Godley Const. Co., Inc. v. McDanielCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
- Hawley v. HobgoodCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
- Stern v. CinomanCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2012
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.