Legal Opinion

Whitehurst v. . Anderson

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 8, 1947PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

Tbe question posed for decision is tbis: Where a summons in proper form, together witb an order extending tbe time for filing complaint, is served on tbe defendants, but such order does not state tbe nature and purpose of tbe suit as provided by Gr. S. 1-121, is tbe service fatally defective and therefore insufficient to bring tbe defendants into court, or is such defect a mere irregularity subject to correction by amendment?

Tbe Court, one member not sitting, being evenly divided in opinion as to tbe correct answer, tbe judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed, accordant witb tbe usual…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Howard v. Queen City Coach Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
  2. Toxey v. . MeggsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Roberts v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Asheville, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  2. Parrish v. PIEDMONT PUBLISHING COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  3. State v. SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955

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

Powered by the Exa API