Davis v. . Whitehurst
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBaknhill, J.
This action is not in the nature of a creditors’ bill. 14 A. J., 679; Hancock v. Wooten, 107 N. C., 9. It is an action at law in which the cause of action of each plaintiff is several. Neither has any interest in the claim of the other. Hence, there is a misjoinder of parties and causes of action. Beam v. Wright, 222 N. C., 174, 22 S. E. (2d), 270; Wingler v. Miller, 221 N. C., 137, 19 S. E. (2d), 247; Frederick v. Insurance Co., 221 N. C., 409, 20 S. E. (2d), 372; Osborne v. Canton, 219 N. C., 139, 13 S. E. (2d), 265; Holland v. Whittington, 215 N. C., 330, 1 S. E. (2d), 813; Smith v. Land…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Keen v. ParkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Keen v. . ParkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Colt v. . KimballSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
- Hancock Bros. & Co. v. WootenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
- Smith v. Greensboro Joint Stock Land BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Calloway v. WyattSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- Morton v. ThorntonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
- Teague v. Siler City Oil Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
- Spruill v. NixonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
- Thomas & Howard Co. of Shelby, Inc. v. American Mutual Liability InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.