Quenby Corp. v. FRANK H. CONNER COMPANY
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtPless, J.
An anomalous situation is presented in this case. Five subcontractors were made new parties — four of them demurred. The fifth filed an answer setting up a counterclaim against the original defendant, the contractor. The plaintiff moved to strike so much of the original defendant’s further answer that in a practical sense it amounted to a motion to strike it in its entirety. This motion was denied, and plaintiff excepted but did not appeal. From adverse rulings upon the demurrers of the new parties, two defendants did not except. The other two, Interstate and Monroe, excepted and appealed.
It…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Burgess v. TrevathanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
- Gaither Corporation v. SkinnerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
- Montgomery v. . BladesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Lineberry v. Security Life & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
- Moore v. . MassengillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Henderson v. MatthewsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
- Vogel v. Reed Supply CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
- Vogel v. Reed Supply CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
- Georgia Hydratane Gas, Inc. v. WhiteCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1964