Dickson v. Fogarty Bros. Transfer, Inc.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Dickson v. Fogarty Bros. Transfer, Inc.

78 S.E.2d 446, 238 N.C. 570, 1953 N.C. LEXIS 586

DecidedNovember 11, 1953

StatusPublished

This text of 78 S.E.2d 446 (Dickson v. Fogarty Bros. Transfer, Inc.) 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

Dickson v. Fogarty Bros. Transfer, Inc., 78 S.E.2d 446, 238 N.C. 570, 1953 N.C. LEXIS 586 (N.C. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

WiNBORNE, J.

This is the question: Was the appearance made by defendant Fogarty Brothers Transfer, Inc., a special appearance, as it purported to be, or was it a general appearance ? This Court holds that it exceeds the purposes for which a special appearance may be had, and was, in law, a general appearance. And a general appearance waives any defects in the jurisdiction' of the court for want of service of summons. The case of In re Blalock, 233 N.C. 493, 64 S.E. 2d 848, 25 A.L.R. 2d 818, in so far as it relates to the subjects of special and general appearances, is decisive of the question here. What is so recently said there is controlling here, and need not be repeated.

[573]*573Decisions cited and relied upon by appellee have been duly considered, and are found to be inapplicable to the situation in hand.

Hence the judgment rendered, and from which this appeal is taken, is erroneous and will be, and it is hereby set aside, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings as to right and justice appertain, and as the law provides. Defendant Fogarty Brothers Transfer, Inc., will be allowed thirty days from the date this opinion is certified to Superior Court in which to demur or answer. G.S. 1-125.

Error and remanded.

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

WiNBORNE, J.

This is the question: Was the appearance made by defendant Fogarty Brothers Transfer, Inc., a special appearance, as it purported to be, or was it a general appearance ? This Court holds that it exceeds the purposes for which a special appearance may be had, and was, in law, a general appearance. And a general appearance waives any defects in the jurisdiction' of the court for want of service of summons. The case of In re Blalock, 233 N.C. 493, 64 S.E. 2d 848, 25 A.L.R. 2d 818, in so far as it relates to the subjects of special and general appearances, is decisive of the question here. What is so recently said there is controlling here, and need not be repeated.

[573]*573Decisions cited and relied upon by appellee have been duly considered, and are found to be inapplicable to the situation in hand.

Hence the judgment rendered, and from which this appeal is taken, is erroneous and will be, and it is hereby set aside, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings as to right and justice appertain, and as the law provides. Defendant Fogarty Brothers Transfer, Inc., will be allowed thirty days from the date this opinion is certified to Superior Court in which to demur or answer. G.S. 1-125.

Error and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

78 S.E.2d 446, 238 N.C. 570, 1953 N.C. LEXIS 586, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dickson-v-fogarty-bros-transfer-inc-nc-1953.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack