Mills v. . Callahan
This text of 36 S.E. 164 (Mills v. . Callahan) 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
Action of ejectment by the widow of L. A. Mills. At Spring Term, 1899, the heirs of L. A. Mills were made parties plaintiff/ and tire defendant excepted. The matter was tried at Fall Term, 1899, when the plaintiff recovered the land, tracing their title from a grant older than, that under which the defendant claimed.
' We had supposed that the power of'the Judge to make additional parties to an action Ava.s settled, especially when *757 the amendment did not change the cause of action, nor work any injustice to the opposing party. Code, sec. 273 ; Bullard v. Johnson, 65 N. C., 436.
The exceptions to evidence, tending to show who were the heirs of L. A. Mills, and to identify and locate the land in dispute, were based on the theory that error in making the heirs parties was committed. They were properly overruled, and we see no error in the record.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
36 S.E. 164, 126 N.C. 756, 1900 N.C. LEXIS 308, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mills-v-callahan-nc-1900.