Daniel v. Gardner
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.
Tbe statute, G.S. 1-153, under which the defendant’s motion to strike was made, provides: “If irrelevant or redundant matter is inserted in a pleading, it may be stricken out on motion of any person aggrieved thereby, . . The defendant lodged his motion before answer, demurrer, or extension of time to plead. This being so, he may claim the benefits of the statute as a matter of right, rather than of grace. Brown v. Hall, 226 N.C. 732, 40 S.E. 2d 412; Hill v. Stansbury, 221 N.C. 339, 20 S.E. 2d 308.
As bearing upon the interpretation and application of this statute, these propositions may be…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Council v. Dickerson's, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- Rhodes v. JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
- Penn Dixie Lines, Inc. v. GrannickSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
- Scott v. . BryanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Call v. StroudSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Pinnix v. ToomeySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- Hinson v. DawsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
- Greene v. Charlotte Chemical Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
- Lutz Industries, Inc. v. Dixie Home StoresSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- RH Bouligny, Inc. v. United Steelworkers of Amer.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.