Henderson v. . Scurlock

Superior Court of North Carolina

Henderson v. . Scurlock

1 N.C. 221

DecidedJuly 5, 1802

StatusPublished

This text of 1 N.C. 221 (Henderson v. . Scurlock) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior 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

Henderson v. . Scurlock, 1 N.C. 221 (N.C. Ct. App. 1802).

Pincite

Opinion

It is stated by the attorney for the plaintiff that he should have exercised his right of taking judgment by default at the last term, but for the expectation that the plea in abatement would have been filed; on which he admits that he had intended to take issue. Had this been done, the plaintiff would now be entitled to a trial of the issue, and, in the event of its being found for him, to a peremptory judgment. He ought not, therefore, to be delayed a term by the omission to plead in abatement.

Motion allowed. *Page 193

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

It is stated by the attorney for the plaintiff that he should have exercised his right of taking judgment by default at the last term, but for the expectation that the plea in abatement would have been filed; on which he admits that he had intended to take issue. Had this been done, the plaintiff would now be entitled to a trial of the issue, and, in the event of its being found for him, to a peremptory judgment. He ought not, therefore, to be delayed a term by the omission to plead in abatement.

Motion allowed. *Page 193

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 N.C. 221, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/henderson-v-scurlock-ncsuperct-1802.