Minton v. . Hughes

73 S.E. 810, 158 N.C. 587, 1912 N.C. LEXIS 87
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided February 28, 1912·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Pee Cueiam.

The Court is of opinion in this case that it is unnecessary to consider the question of excusable neglect for which his Honor declined to set aside the judgment in the court below. Not only must the defendant show excusable neglect as defined by many decisions of this Court, but he must also show that he has meritorious defense. Norton v. McLaurin, 125 N. C., 189; Turner v. Machine Co., 133 N. C., 384.

Upon consideration of this feature of the case, we are of the opinion that defendant’s petition and affidavits show no defense to the action which could avail him in law. Pharr v. Russell, 42 N. C., 222.

Affirmed.

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

Minton v. . Hughes, 73 S.E. 810, 158 N.C. 587, 1912 N.C. LEXIS 87 (N.C. 1912).

73 S.E. 810 (Minton v. . Hughes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Owens v. Voncannon
111 S.E.2d 700 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1959)
Cahoon v. . Brinkley
96 S.E. 650 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1918)
Bank of Union v. Brock
94 S.E. 301 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1917)
Beaufort Lumber Co. v. Cottingham
92 S.E. 9 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1917)
Estes v. . Rash
87 S.E. 109 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1915)
Allen v. . McPherson
84 S.E. 766 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1915)
Miller v. . Curl
77 S.E. 952 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1913)