Bank of Statesville v. Bogle
This text of 85 N.C. 203 (Bank of Statesville v. Bogle) 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.
Opinion
The stress of the-argument in this court was Üaid upon the sufficiency of -the answer, in setting up the ■defence of the statute of limitations — the plaintiff contending that as pleaded without any statement of facts to support it, it was but a mere announcement of a conclusion of law. We do not feel at liberty, however, to go into that ■question, as. the demurrer itself is so defective as to require that it should be disregarded:
A general demurrer that the-complaint .(or answer) does •not set forth facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action ¡(or defence) should be overruled,' or rather, disregarded.” Love v. Commissioners of Chatham, 64 N. C., 706.
However much the correctness of the decision of the court in that case may have been questioned at the time, it has stood too long, and been to often approved, to admit of it at this late day-
No error. Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
85 N.C. 203, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bank-of-statesville-v-bogle-nc-1881.