Commissioner of Banks Ex Rel. United Bank and Trust Co. v. Gavin

163 S.E. 926, 202 N.C. 843, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 269
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided April 20, 1932·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

. _ Pee CueiaM.

The judgment in this action is affirmed on the authority of Brown v. Polk, 201 N. C., 375, 160 S. E., 357, and decisions of this Court cited in the opinion in that case. A judgment in the action pending in the Superior Court of Lee County at the date of the commencement of this action would not support a plea of res judicata in this action. The causes of action alleged in the complaints in the two actions are not the same; and the results sought are dissimilar. This renders the plea in abatement bad.

The Commissioner of Banks by name should be made a party to this action. This may be done by amendment. Commissioner of Banks v. Harvey, ante, 380.

Affirmed.

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

Commissioner of Banks Ex Rel. United Bank and Trust Co. v. Gavin, 163 S.E. 926, 202 N.C. 843, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 269 (N.C. 1932).

163 S.E. 926 (Commissioner of Banks Ex Rel. United Bank and Trust Co. v. Gavin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Taylor v. Schaub
225 N.C. 134 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1945)