Drinkwater v. Western Union Telegraph Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Drinkwater v. Western Union Telegraph Co.

168 S.E. 410, 204 N.C. 224, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 367

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedFebruary 22, 1933

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 168 S.E. 410 (Drinkwater v. Western Union Telegraph Co.) 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

Drinkwater v. Western Union Telegraph Co., 168 S.E. 410, 204 N.C. 224, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 367 (N.C. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.,

after stating the case: It is provided by C. S., 441, that an action to recover on a contract, obligation or liability arising out of contract, express or implied, except those mentioned in preceding sections, shall be commenced within three years from the date of the accrual of the cause of action. Welfare v. Thompson, 83 N. C., 276. If not brought within this time, upon the plea of the statute by the defendant, such right of action is deemed to be barred. Trust Co. v. Clifton, 203 N. C., 483. High Point v. Clinard, ante, 149.

The defendant having pleaded the statute of limitations, the burden was on the plaintiff to show that his suit was commenced within three years from the time of the accrual of the cause of action or that otherwise it was not barred. Rankin v. Oates, 183 N. C., 517, 112 S. E., 32. This has been the prevailing rule with us relative to the burden of proof where the statute of limitations is properly pleaded. Marks v. McLeod, 203 N. C., 257, 165 S. E., 693; Tillery v. Lumber Co., 172 N. C., 296, 90 S. E., 196.

Admittedly, the plaintiff’s right of action accrued 20 March, 1928. The present suit was instituted 8 April, 1931. This was too late, unless the plaintiff has otherwise saved himself from the running of the statute. To meet this situation, plaintiff seeks to avail himself of the provisions of C. S., 415, which authorizes a fresh action, after nonsuit, for the same cause, at any time within one year, by showing that within the statutory period suit was commenced in the Recorder’s Court of Dare County, judgment of nonsuit entered therein, and the costs of the original action paid before the commencement of the present suit.

But it does not appear that the “new action” is to enforce the same cause of action intended to be set up in the “original action,” as no complaint was filed therein. Loan Co. v. Warren, ante, 50. The identity of the causes may not be shown by parol. Motsinger v. Hauser, 195 N. C., 483, 142 S. E., 589. Hence, judgment of nonsuit should have been entered.

Reversed.

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

Stacy, C. J.,

after stating the case: It is provided by C. S., 441, that an action to recover on a contract, obligation or liability arising out of contract, express or implied, except those mentioned in preceding sections, shall be commenced within three years from the date of the accrual of the cause of action. Welfare v. Thompson, 83 N. C., 276. If not brought within this time, upon the plea of the statute by the defendant, such right of action is deemed to be barred. Trust Co. v. Clifton, 203 N. C., 483. High Point v. Clinard, ante, 149.

The defendant having pleaded the statute of limitations, the burden was on the plaintiff to show that his suit was commenced within three years from the time of the accrual of the cause of action or that otherwise it was not barred. Rankin v. Oates, 183 N. C., 517, 112 S. E., 32. This has been the prevailing rule with us relative to the burden of proof where the statute of limitations is properly pleaded. Marks v. McLeod, 203 N. C., 257, 165 S. E., 693; Tillery v. Lumber Co., 172 N. C., 296, 90 S. E., 196.

Admittedly, the plaintiff’s right of action accrued 20 March, 1928. The present suit was instituted 8 April, 1931. This was too late, unless the plaintiff has otherwise saved himself from the running of the statute. To meet this situation, plaintiff seeks to avail himself of the provisions of C. S., 415, which authorizes a fresh action, after nonsuit, for the same cause, at any time within one year, by showing that within the statutory period suit was commenced in the Recorder’s Court of Dare County, judgment of nonsuit entered therein, and the costs of the original action paid before the commencement of the present suit.

But it does not appear that the “new action” is to enforce the same cause of action intended to be set up in the “original action,” as no complaint was filed therein. Loan Co. v. Warren, ante, 50. The identity of the causes may not be shown by parol. Motsinger v. Hauser, 195 N. C., 483, 142 S. E., 589. Hence, judgment of nonsuit should have been entered.

Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 S.E. 410, 204 N.C. 224, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 367, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/drinkwater-v-western-union-telegraph-co-nc-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack