Murchison National Bank v. McCormick

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Murchison National Bank v. McCormick

133 S.E. 184, 192 N.C. 44, 1926 N.C. LEXIS 219

DecidedMay 27, 1926

StatusPublished

This text of 133 S.E. 184 (Murchison National Bank v. McCormick) 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.

Bluebook

Murchison National Bank v. McCormick, 133 S.E. 184, 192 N.C. 44, 1926 N.C. LEXIS 219 (N.C. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

CoNNoe, J.

This appeal involves the same questions, between the same parties, as those presented in the appeal in No. 291. The notes alleged to have been executed by the Merchants and Farmers Bank of Maxton, set out in the complaint in this action are not the same as those set out in the complaint in the action in which the order for compulsory reference was affirmed in No. 291. Herein is the only difference in the two actions. The orders to which defendants excepted are identical. The appeals are companions and were argued in this Court together. It was conceded that the disposition of one appeal would determine the disposition of the other.

The motion for the writ of prohibition in this action is dismissed. The order for compulsory reference is

Affirmed.

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

CoNNoe, J.

This appeal involves the same questions, between the same parties, as those presented in the appeal in No. 291. The notes alleged to have been executed by the Merchants and Farmers Bank of Maxton, set out in the complaint in this action are not the same as those set out in the complaint in the action in which the order for compulsory reference was affirmed in No. 291. Herein is the only difference in the two actions. The orders to which defendants excepted are identical. The appeals are companions and were argued in this Court together. It was conceded that the disposition of one appeal would determine the disposition of the other.

The motion for the writ of prohibition in this action is dismissed. The order for compulsory reference is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

133 S.E. 184, 192 N.C. 44, 1926 N.C. LEXIS 219, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murchison-national-bank-v-mccormick-nc-1926.