Tucker v. . Baker
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Civil Action tried at Fall Term, 1881, of Franklin Superior Court, before Gudger J. The action was brought to fall term, 1879, and the entry was then made on the docket — “Time to file pleadings.”
Read the full summary
Civil Action tried at Fall Term, 1881, of Franklin Superior Court, before Gudger J. The action was brought to fall term, 1879, and the entry was then made on the docket — “Time to file pleadings.” The complaint was filed just before spring term, 1881, and is as follows: 1. That Jame3 Murpny on the 25th of May, 1859, executed to H. Harris his promissory note under seal in the-sum'of three hundred dollars, in words and figures as follows, to wit, One day after date I promise to pay H. Harris, or order, three hundred dollars for value received. Witness my hand and seal, May 25th, 1859. (Signed…
1Opinion of the CourtAshe, J.
In this court the counsel for defendant moved that the action be dismissed for the reason, that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and we are of the opinion the objection is well founded.
The Code of Civil Procedure provides (section 95) that the defendant-may demur to the complaint when it shall appear upon the face thereof, either,
1. That the court has no jurisdiction of the person of the defendant or the subject of the action, or,
2. That the plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue, or
3. That there is another action pending between the same parties…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Pescud v. . HawkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1874
3Cited by23 opinions
- McKinnon v. . MorrisonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
- Johnson v. . FinchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
- Knowles v. Norfolk Southern RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
- Conley v. Richmond & Danville RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
- Miller v. . RobertsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.