Williams v. Denning

133 S.E.2d 150, 260 N.C. 539, 1963 N.C. LEXIS 744
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided November 20, 1963·No. 529·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

PER CüRIAm.

Plaintiff took eleven exceptions1 — ten to the order ¡sustaining defendants’ motion to strike, one to the refusal to allow its motion for judgment ¡by default.

The exceptions are no|t grouped 'in the record as required by Rule 19(3) of the Court (254 N.C. 797). An order striking allegations contained in ¡a pleading is not appealable. The remedy, if tire order is deemed erroneous, isiby certiorari. Rule 4(a) (2) (254 N.C. 785).

Plaintiff’s pleadings are a complaint, G.S. 1-121, and a reply, G.S. 1-140. Defendants pleadings ¡are m answer and a demurrer, G.S. 1-124. A motion, is >an application for 'an order, G.S. 1-578. It is not a pleading within the meaning of G.S. 1-144. Brownfield v. South Carolina, 189 U.S. 426, 47 L. ed. 882.

The order allowing plaintiff to file an amended complaint and defendant .time thereafter to answer was made in the court’s discretion and as such is not reviewabie in the absence of manifest abuse, which is not here suggested. Osborne v. Canton, 219 N.C. 139, 13 S.E. 2d 265.

Appeal dismissed.

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

Williams v. Denning, 133 S.E.2d 150, 260 N.C. 539, 1963 N.C. LEXIS 744 (N.C. 1963).

133 S.E.2d 150 (Williams v. Denning) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Day v. Coffey
315 S.E.2d 96 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1984)
O'Neill v. Southern National Bank
252 S.E.2d 231 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1979)
Funderburk v. Justice
214 S.E.2d 310 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1975)
Investment Properties of Asheville, Inc. v. Allen
188 S.E.2d 441 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1972)