Bailey Ex Rel. Bailey v. Roberts
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtOlaeicsoN, J.
Tbe first contention made by defendants in tbe demurrer is to tbe effect that tbe plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue. We think this position taken by defendants has been abandoned.
In tbe judgment of tbe court below is tbe following: “The court being of tbe opinion that E. D. Bailey has been properly appointed as tbe next friend and, as sucb, is entitled to prosecute this cause on behalf of tbe infant, Charles Bailey.” The defendants, as to this aspect, filed no exception and assignment of error, nor did they comply with Rule 28 (200 N. C., 831), which, in part, is as follows: “Exceptions…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Ballinger v. . ThomasSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
- Rountree v. . FountainSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
- Moses v. Town of MorgantonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
- Finch v. North Carolina RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
- White v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- McDaniel v. . LeggettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945