Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Hendrix v. Alsop

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 3, 1971No. 7018SC421Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Judge Graham

concurring in part and dissenting in part:

I agree with the opinion of the majority affirming the dismissal of this action as to defendants Pfizer and Roerig and affirming the denial of plaintiff’s motion to vacate Judge Collier’s order of 20 August 1968. I think the order dismissing the action against Alsop should also be affirmed.

G.S. 1A-1, Rule 3, provides that “[i]f the complaint is not filed within the period specified in the clerk’s order, the action shall abate.” This rule, effective 1 January 1970, was not in effect at the time the complaint was filed, and I agree with the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Bailey v. DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  2. Deanes v. ClarkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  3. Strickland v. JacksonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963

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

Powered by the Exa API