St. Dennis v. Thomas
This text of 70 S.E.2d 3 (St. Dennis v. Thomas) 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
Tbe trial judge was correct in overruling tbe plea in abatement. Brown v. Polk, 201 N.C. 375, 160 S.E. 357.
Tbe parties in tbe two suits are not identical. Tbe causes of action are different, and tbe results sought are dissimilar. Tbe final judgment in tbe prior action instituted by L. W. Tbomas and wife, Editb R. Tbomas, against John St. Dennis and wife, Mignon M. St. Dennis, would not prop[393]*393erly support a plea of res judicata, in tbe present action. Tbis is a crucial test of identity. Hawkins v. Hughes, 87 N.C. 115; 1 C.J. 56; Bank v. Broadhurst, 197 N.C. 365, 148 S.E. 452; Thompson v. Herring, 203 N.C. 112, 164 S.E. 619; Oil Co. v. Fertilizer Co., 204 N.C. 362, 168 S.E. 411.
Nothing was said in tbe cases cited in appellants’ brief wbicb militates against our present position.
Tbe judgment of tbe court below must be
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
70 S.E.2d 3, 235 N.C. 391, 1952 N.C. LEXIS 399, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/st-dennis-v-thomas-nc-1952.