Morris v. . Cleve

139 S.E. 230, 194 N.C. 202, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 43
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided September 14, 1927·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

This case was before us at the Spring Term, 1927, and is reported in 193 N. C., 389. Within ten days after the receipt of the certificate from this Court, sustaining the demurrer interposed by the present appealing defendants, the plaintiff, after due notice, moved for leave to amend the complaint under C. S., 515. (See, also, C. S., 546, and annotations thereunder.) This motion was allowed, and from the *203 order permitting plaintiff to file an amended complaint the defendants, D. W. Cleve and W. A. Oleve, appeal, assigning error in said ruling. The appeal must be dismissed as premature, since the proper procedure was to note an exception and appeal from the final judgment, if adverse to the defendants. Goodwin v. Fertilizer Works, 123 N. C., 162; Parker v. Harden, 122 N. C., 111.

Appeal dismissed.

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

Morris v. . Cleve, 139 S.E. 230, 194 N.C. 202, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 43 (N.C. 1927).

139 S.E. 230 (Morris v. . Cleve) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pardue v. Charlotte Motor Speedway, Inc.
163 S.E.2d 82 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1968)
State v. . Clarke
24 S.E.2d 619 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1943)
Hood, Comr. of Banks v. . Motor Co.
183 S.E. 529 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1936)
Morris v. . Cleve
148 S.E. 253 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1929)