Meekins v. Coastal Game Preserves

192 S.E. 848, 212 N.C. 96, 1937 N.C. LEXIS 246
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided September 22, 1937·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Tbe order appealed from granted tbe plaintiff thirty days within which to amend tbe complaint and affidavits upon which tbe attachment was based. Tbe power of tbe court to permit amendments of pleadings and process is ample (Rushing v. Ashcraft, 211 N. C., 627). Hence, tbe appeal before tbe time within which amendments were permitted to be filed was premature. What amendments, if any, will be made and their effect upon defendants’ motion cannot now be properly determined. Tbe cause is remanded to the Superior Court for’further proceedings, the defendants’ exception being preserved. Thomas v. Carteret County, 180 N. C., 109; Farr v. Lumber Co., 182 N. C., 725.

Remanded.

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

Meekins v. Coastal Game Preserves, 192 S.E. 848, 212 N.C. 96, 1937 N.C. LEXIS 246 (N.C. 1937).

192 S.E. 848 (Meekins v. Coastal Game Preserves) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Farr v. Babcock Lumber Co.
109 S.E. 833 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1921)
Thomas v. County of Carteret
104 S.E. 75 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1920)
Rushing v. . Ashcraft
191 S.E. 332 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1937)