Hood, Comr. of Banks v. . Motor Co.

183 S.E. 529, 209 N.C. 303, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 468

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

Whether tbe defendants should have been allowed to amend tbeir counterclaim, after demurrer sustained, was a matter addressed to tbe sound discretion of tbe trial court, and is not reviewable on appeal. C. S., 515; McKeel v. Latham, 203 N. C., 246, 165 S. E., 694; Morris v. Cleve, 194 N. C., 202, 139 S. E., 230.

There was no error in overruling tbe demurrer to tbe counterclaim as amended. Griffin v. Bank, 205 N. C., 253, 171 S. E., 71. Indeed, it might well have been disregarded (C. S., 512), or treated as a motion to dismiss (Elam v. Barnes, 110 N. C., 73, 14 S. E., 621), from tbe refusal of which no appeal lies. Seawell v. Cole, 194 N. C., 546, 140 S. E., 85; Plemmons v. Improvement Co., 108 N. C., 614, 13 S. E., 188.

Affirmed.

Devin, J., took no part in tbe consideration or decision of this case.