Hood, Comr. of Banks v. . Motor Co.
This text of 183 S.E. 529 (Hood, Comr. of Banks v. . Motor 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.
Opinion
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.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
183 S.E. 529, 209 N.C. 303, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 468, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hood-comr-of-banks-v-motor-co-nc-1936.