Ammons v. Layton

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Ammons v. Layton

86 S.E.2d 915, 242 N.C. 122, 1955 N.C. LEXIS 471

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedApril 13, 1955

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 86 S.E.2d 915 (Ammons v. Layton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ammons v. Layton, 86 S.E.2d 915, 242 N.C. 122, 1955 N.C. LEXIS 471 (N.C. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

JOHNSON, J.

The essential rules governing appeals from lower court rulings on motions to strike are collected and assembled in Daniel v. Gardner, 240 N.C. 249, 81 S.E. 2d 660. Under application of the prin- . ciples there stated, we conclude it has not been made to appear that the defendant will be prejudiced by the allegations challenged on this appeal. See Ledford v. Transportation Co., 237 N.C. 317, 74 S.E. 2d 653; Hinson v. Britt, 232 N.C. 379, 61 S.E. 2d 185. See also Wright v. Credit Co., 212 N.C. 87, 192 S.E. 844 ; 33 Am. Jur., Libel and Slander, sections 236 and 241.

It is noted that the assignment of error relating to Paragraph 4 of the complaint is not brought forward in the brief. Hence this assignment is treated as abandoned. Rule 28, Rules of Practice in the Supreme Court, 221 N.C. 544; S. v. Cole, 241 N.C. 576, 86 S.E. 2d 203.

[123]*123The order entered below is

Affirmed.

BaRNHIll, C. J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

JOHNSON, J.

The essential rules governing appeals from lower court rulings on motions to strike are collected and assembled in Daniel v. Gardner, 240 N.C. 249, 81 S.E. 2d 660. Under application of the prin- . ciples there stated, we conclude it has not been made to appear that the defendant will be prejudiced by the allegations challenged on this appeal. See Ledford v. Transportation Co., 237 N.C. 317, 74 S.E. 2d 653; Hinson v. Britt, 232 N.C. 379, 61 S.E. 2d 185. See also Wright v. Credit Co., 212 N.C. 87, 192 S.E. 844 ; 33 Am. Jur., Libel and Slander, sections 236 and 241.

It is noted that the assignment of error relating to Paragraph 4 of the complaint is not brought forward in the brief. Hence this assignment is treated as abandoned. Rule 28, Rules of Practice in the Supreme Court, 221 N.C. 544; S. v. Cole, 241 N.C. 576, 86 S.E. 2d 203.

[123]*123The order entered below is

Affirmed.

BaRNHIll, C. J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

86 S.E.2d 915, 242 N.C. 122, 1955 N.C. LEXIS 471, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ammons-v-layton-nc-1955.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack