Theiling v. . Wilson

167 S.E. 32, 203 N.C. 809, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 431
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided January 4, 1933·Published

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

No cause of action is stated against the board of commissioners of Mecklenburg County. The plaintiff simply alleges that his employer is indebted to him and that the board of county commissioners is indebted to his employer. The demurrer was properly sustained. Aman v. Walker, 165 N. C., 224, 81 S. E., 162.

But for a different reason, the appeal must be dismissed. Plaintiff has failed to file printed or mimeographed copies of brief as required by Rule 27. To dispense with the rule in this case would require its abrogation. Pr uit v. Wood, 199 N. C., 788, 156 S. E., 126; Byrd v. Southerland, 186 N. C., 384, 119 S. E., 2.

Appeal dismissed.

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

Theiling v. . Wilson, 167 S.E. 32, 203 N.C. 809, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 431 (N.C. 1933).

167 S.E. 32 (Theiling v. . Wilson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Byrd v. . Southerland
119 S.E. 2 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1923)
Pruitt v. . Wood
156 S.E. 126 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1930)
Aman v. . Walker
81 S.E. 162 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1914)
Pruitt v. Wood
199 N.C. 788 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1930)