Hafleigh v. Crossingham
206 N.C. 333
This text of 206 N.C. 333 (Hafleigh v. Crossingham) 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
Hafleigh v. Crossingham, 206 N.C. 333 (N.C. 1934).
Opinion
The trial judge ruled correctly. The denial of a motion for judgment on the pleadings is not appealable, as the same is not a final judgment. It was the duty of the plaintiff to have excepted to the refusal of the judge to grant the motion so that it could have been considered on an appeal from the final judgment. Gilliam v. Jones, 191 N. C., 621, 132 S. E., 566.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Erickson v. Starling
71 S.E.2d 384 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1952)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
206 N.C. 333, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hafleigh-v-crossingham-nc-1934.