Coin Machine Acceptance Corp. v. Pillman

69 S.E.2d 563, 235 N.C. 295, 1952 N.C. LEXIS 385
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMarch 19, 1952
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 69 S.E.2d 563 (Coin Machine Acceptance Corp. v. Pillman) 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
Coin Machine Acceptance Corp. v. Pillman, 69 S.E.2d 563, 235 N.C. 295, 1952 N.C. LEXIS 385 (N.C. 1952).

Opinion

DenNy, J.

The defendant interposed a demurrer ore tenus in this Court on the ground that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against the defendant.

Among the grounds upon which the defendant contends the demurrer should be sustained is the fact that the complaint does not allege that the plaintiff is the owner of the note or notes secured by the conditional sales agreement. As a matter of fact, it does not appear on the face of the complaint that any note or notes were executed in connection with the [297]*297conditional sales agreement upon which the action is bottomed. The demurrer is without merit and will not be sustained. However, the plaintiff may desire to recast its pleadings so as to allege that it is the owner and holder for value and in due course of any note or notes secured by the conditional sales agreement.

The defendant presents a more serious question by his exception to the order of compulsory reference. The relief which the plaintiff seeks in the instant action and the issues raised on the pleadings, are not such as to authorize a compulsory reference within the purview of G.S. 1-189. Alston v. Robertson, 233 N.C. 309, 63 S.E. 2d 632.

The plaintiff contends, however, that the court may, in the exercise of its equitable powers, order a reference irrespective of the provisions contained in G.S. 1-189, citing North Carolina Practice and Procedure by McIntosh, section 525, page 567. Even so, there is no equitable relief involved in this action to sustain such an order. The defendant is entitled to a new trial and it is so ordered.

N ew trial.

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

Related

Commercial Finance Co. v. Culler
73 S.E.2d 780 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1953)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
69 S.E.2d 563, 235 N.C. 295, 1952 N.C. LEXIS 385, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coin-machine-acceptance-corp-v-pillman-nc-1952.