Legal Opinion

Long v. Love

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 2, 1949PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWinboeNE, J.

Upon motion of any party aggrieved, aptly made, tbe court may strike out irrelevant and redundant matter appearing in a complaint. G.S. 1-153, formerly G.S. 537. Defendant proceeds under tbis authority, and challenges tbe decision of tbe court below in denying bis motion. Tbis brings into focus tbe portions of tbe complaint to wbicb objection is made.

■ In tbis connection it is provided by statute that tbe complaint must contain, among other things, “a plain and concise statement of tbe facts constituting a cause of action, without unnecessary repetition.” G.S. 1-122. Moreover, it is pertinent…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Winders v. Hill.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  2. Revis v. City of AshevilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
  3. Brown v. . HallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
  4. Wooden v. StrewNew York Supreme Court · 1853
  5. Truelove v. Durham & Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1943

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Pratt v. BishopSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  2. Woodard v. MordecaiSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  3. Allred v. GravesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  4. Daniel v. GardnerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  5. Plummer v. Henry Ex Rel. RobertsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969

3 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