Legal Opinion

City of Wilmington v. Board of Education

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 20, 1936PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Per curiam

It very rarely happens that the making of additional parties proves prejudicial, and hence orders making such parties are discretionary with the trial court, and are not reviewable upon appeal. Tillery v. Candler, 118 N. C., 888; Bernard v. Shemwell, 139 N. C., 446; Maggett v. Roberts, 108 N. C., 174. By proper amendment new parties may be brought into a pending action. Dobson v. Southern Ry. Co., 129 N. C., 289.

A judge of the Superior Court has within his sound discretion the statutory authority to permit the plaintiff to amend his complaint when thereby the ground for the alleged cause is…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Maggett v. RobertsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
  2. Bernard v. Shemwell.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
  3. Goins v. . SargentSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
  4. Dobson v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1901
  5. State Ex Rel. Tillery v. CandlerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1896

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. City of Raleigh v. EdwardsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  2. Burgess v. TrevathanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  3. Service Fire Insurance v. Horton Motor Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  4. Jones v. . GriggsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  5. Wheeler v. WheelerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954

6 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