Legal Opinion

Smith v. . Haughton

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 23, 1934PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClabksoN, J.

From the evidence appearing in the record, we think the special appearance of Steelcote Manufacturing Company, a foreign corporation, to dismiss the action as to want of jurisdiction, should have been granted. We do not think the special appearance taking the language and intent of the motion, could be construed as a general appearance. N. C. Code, 1931 (Michie), section 511: “Grounds for— The defendant’may demur to the complaint when it appears upon the face thereof, either that: (1) The court has no jurisdiction of the person of the defendant, or of the subject of the action,” etc.

In Motor…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Ashley v. . BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  2. Bigham v. . FoorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  3. Hampton v. . Board of EducationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Ewing v. ThompsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  2. Dowling v. . WintersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
  3. Four County Agricultural Credit Corp. v. SatterfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  4. Williams v. . CooperSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
  5. Alberts v. . AlbertsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940

4 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