Langley v. Gore

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Langley v. Gore

87 S.E.2d 519, 242 N.C. 302, 1955 N.C. LEXIS 506

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedMay 25, 1955

Docket604

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 87 S.E.2d 519 (Langley v. Gore) 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

Langley v. Gore, 87 S.E.2d 519, 242 N.C. 302, 1955 N.C. LEXIS 506 (N.C. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

WiNBORNE, J.

This appeal is directed solely to the judgment of the court below in respect to disposition of the fund of money in the hands of the Clerk of Superior Court. But there is nothing in the record to show that defendants have any interest in, or claim to it. Indeed, defendants say in their brief, filed on this appeal, that they “did not claim the fund as theirs personally.” They assert, however, reasons why they think plaintiffs are not entitled to the fund. Nevertheless, they are not the parties aggrieved.

Any party aggrieved may appeal in the cases prescribed in Chapter 1 of General Statutes entitled “Civil Procedure.” G.S. 1-271. And this Court, in interpreting and applying this statute, has uniformly held that only the party aggrieved may appeal from the Superior Court to the Supreme Court. See Watkins v. Grier, 224 N.C. 339, 30 S.E. 2d 223, and numerous other cases.

Therefore, we are constrained to hold that by this appeal this Court has not acquired jurisdiction of any matter to which the action or proceeding may relate. Such being the case, the Court is impelled ex mero motu to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Henderson County v. Smyth, 216 N.C. 421, 5 S.E. 2d 136, where prior cases are cited. See also Baker v. Varser, 239 N.C. 180, 79 S.E. 2d 757, and cases cited.

Appeal dismissed.

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

WiNBORNE, J.

This appeal is directed solely to the judgment of the court below in respect to disposition of the fund of money in the hands of the Clerk of Superior Court. But there is nothing in the record to show that defendants have any interest in, or claim to it. Indeed, defendants say in their brief, filed on this appeal, that they “did not claim the fund as theirs personally.” They assert, however, reasons why they think plaintiffs are not entitled to the fund. Nevertheless, they are not the parties aggrieved.

Any party aggrieved may appeal in the cases prescribed in Chapter 1 of General Statutes entitled “Civil Procedure.” G.S. 1-271. And this Court, in interpreting and applying this statute, has uniformly held that only the party aggrieved may appeal from the Superior Court to the Supreme Court. See Watkins v. Grier, 224 N.C. 339, 30 S.E. 2d 223, and numerous other cases.

Therefore, we are constrained to hold that by this appeal this Court has not acquired jurisdiction of any matter to which the action or proceeding may relate. Such being the case, the Court is impelled ex mero motu to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Henderson County v. Smyth, 216 N.C. 421, 5 S.E. 2d 136, where prior cases are cited. See also Baker v. Varser, 239 N.C. 180, 79 S.E. 2d 757, and cases cited.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

87 S.E.2d 519, 242 N.C. 302, 1955 N.C. LEXIS 506, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/langley-v-gore-nc-1955.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack