Houston v. Lumber Co.

48 S.E. 738, 136 N.C. 328, 1904 N.C. LEXIS 268
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedNovember 1, 1904
StatusPublished

This text of 48 S.E. 738 (Houston v. Lumber 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
Houston v. Lumber Co., 48 S.E. 738, 136 N.C. 328, 1904 N.C. LEXIS 268 (N.C. 1904).

Opinion

Clark, C. J.

The summons issued against the “Greensboro Lumber Co. and J. T. B. Shaw, receiver.” It was served upon “J. T. B. Shaw, receiver of the Greensboro /Lumber Company.” The action was dismissed as to the receiver on demurrer because leave of Court had not been obtained to bring action against the receiver.. There was no answer or demurrer filed as to the company and judgment against it was taken by default and inquiry. After the adjournment for the term, but within ten days thereafter, the defendant entered a special appearance and gave notice of appeal.

*329 A party to an action can take bis appeal by serving notice witbin ten days after adjournment of Court. The Code, sec. 549; Russell v. Hearne, 113 N. C., 361; Davison v. Land Co., 120 N. C., 259. But tbe appeal must be taken by a party to tbe action, and tbe entry of a special jippearance did not authorize counsel so appearing to appeal. An appeal by counsel “appearing specially” is no appeal. Clark v. Mfg. Co., 110 N. C., 111.

Tbe appeal, even if it bad been regularly taken, was premature. If not duly served witb process, tbe defendant “could either have disregarded tbe further proceedings of tbe Court, which would have been a nullity, or it could have bad its exception noted and proceeded witb tbe trial.” Guilford v. Georgia Co., 109 N. C., 312; Mullen v. Canal Co., 112 N. C., 109, and numerous cases cited in Clark’s Code (3 Ed.), p. 738; Brown v. Nimocks, 126 N. C., 808; Cooper v. Wyman, 122 N. C., 784, 65 Am. St. Rep., 731.

Appeal Dismissed.

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

Related

Mullen v. Norfolk & North Carolina Canal Co.
16 S.E. 901 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1893)
Clark v. Deloach Mills Manufacturing Co.
14 S.E. 518 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1892)
Davison v. West Oxford Land Co.
26 S.E. 782 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1897)
Russell v. . Hearne
18 S.E. 711 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1893)
Cooper v. . Wyman
29 S.E. 947 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1898)
Brown & Co. v. Nimocks
36 S.E. 278 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1900)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
48 S.E. 738, 136 N.C. 328, 1904 N.C. LEXIS 268, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/houston-v-lumber-co-nc-1904.