Legal Opinion

Rogers v. Rogers

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 6, 1979No. 7817DC261PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CLARK, Judge.

Defendant first contends that the court erred in granting plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint to include a demand for attorney’s fees. G.S. 1A-1, Rule 15(a) provides that leave to amend shall be “freely given when justice so requires.” The trial judge has broad discretionary powers to permit amendments to any pleading. See, Dobias v. White, 240 N.C. 680, 83 S.E. 2d 785 (1954), and the court’s ruling is not reviewable on appeal in absence of a showing of abuse of discretion. Mangum v. Surles, 12 N.C. App. 547, 183 S.E. 2d 839 (1971), rev’d on other grounds, 281 N.C. 91, 187…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Fuchs v. FuchsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
  2. Dobias v. WhiteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  3. In Re Custody of StancilCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1971
  4. Vernon v. CristSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
  5. Mangum v. SurlesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Atwell v. AtwellCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
  2. Evans v. CraddockCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
  3. Patton v. PattonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
  4. Swindell v. OvertonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
  5. Gordon v. GordonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980

5 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