Metcalf v. . Alley

24 N.C. 38
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided December 5, 1841·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Daniel, J.

It appears that Alley, without authority, caused Metcalf to be joined as a plaintiff in the writ and declaration against Brown. In the progress of that suit, when Metcalf first learned that his name had been used, he came into Court and moved to dismiss it. The motion was opposed by Alley, and at his instance the suit was continued in Court till it was tried, when there was a judgment against the plaintiffs for costs. Bradley being out of the State, Met-calf was forced by execution to pay these costs. It appears to us that the instruction of the Judge, upon these facts appearing in evidence, was correct. The plaintiff had sustained an injury in consequence of the wrongful acts of the defendant; and the appropriate remedy was an action of trespass on the case. The judgment must be affirmed.

Per Curiam. Judgment affirmed.

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

Metcalf v. . Alley, 24 N.C. 38 (N.C. 1841).

24 N.C. 38 (Metcalf v. . Alley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hackett v. . McMillan
17 S.E. 433 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1893)