Legal Opinion

Lehrer v. EDGECOMBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided January 12, 1972No. 717SC646PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MALLARD, Chief Judge.

Neither of the motions filed by Dobie contained the rule number under which the movant was proceeding. The trial judge should have declined to rule upon the motions because they did not comply with Rule 6 of the “General Rules of Practice for the Superior and District Courts” as contained in Volume 276, page 735, of the North Carolina Reports. However, since plaintiff has not argued this failure, we consider the appeal on its merits.

The appeal presents this question for decision: Is the pend-ency of a prior action by the plaintiff against the defendant Dobie in a United…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. McDowell v. Blythe Bros. Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  2. Cushing v. CushingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  3. Kesterson v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
  4. In Re the Custody of SkipperSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Bockweg v. AndersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1993
  2. Gardner v. GardnerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
  3. Wood v. WoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  4. Sowell v. ClarkCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
  5. Williams v. HartisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1973

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API