Legal Opinion

Battle v. Mercer

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 19, 1924PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClarkson, J.

This was a motion to set aside a judgment for excusable neglect. The court below found “that neither of the defendants Mary S. Mercer, John E. Mercer, T. C. Tilghman or Margaret M. Tilghman has a meritorious defense to this action.”

In Farmers and Merchants Bank v. Otho H. Duke, Admr., ante, 389, it is said: “It is well settled in this State that the application should show not only mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect, but also a meritorious defense. Land Co. v. Wooten, 177 N. C., 250, and cases cited; 23 Cyc., 962, 1031.”

As to the merits of the controversy, the plaintiffs in…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Skinner v. . TerrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
  2. Thompson v. . SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
  3. Jones-Onslow Land Co. v. WootenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
  4. Taylor v. . PopeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
  5. Hunter v. . KellySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Patrick Ex Rel. Michal v. BryanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
  2. Dunn v. . JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
  3. Calaway v. . HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  4. Morris v. WilkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  5. Howard v. . HinsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926

2 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