Workman v. Workman

89 S.E.2d 390, 242 N.C. 726, 1955 N.C. LEXIS 663
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided October 12, 1955·No. 233·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Denny, J.

A demurrer to a complaint, on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, should be overruled if the complaint, when liberally construed in favor of the pleader, as it must be on demurrer, G.S. 1-151, alleges facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. Or to put it another way, if any portion of the complaint alleges facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, or if facts sufficient for that purpose can be reasonably and fairly gathered from it, the pleading will survive the demurrer. Bryant v. Ice Company, 233 N.C. 266, 63 S.E. 2d 547, and cited cases.

The plaintiff’s complaint, when liberally considered in favor of the pleader, alleges that the defendant abandoned the plaintiff on 5 December, 1954, and has failed to provide adequate support for her. Caddell v. Caddell, 236 N.C. 686, 73 S.E. 2d 923. The contention that the complaint does not allege that the abandonment was wilful is without merit. Abandonment imports wilfulness. Brooks v. Brooks, 226 N.C. 280, 37 S.E. 2d 909.

No exception was entered to the order signed on 29 April, 1955, directing the defendant to produce Mary Lou Workman, the infant child of *728 the marriage, before the court, on 16 May, 1955, in order that the question of her custody might be determined. Therefore, we are not called upon to consider that order on this appeal. Even so, see In re Fitzgerald, post, 732. The appellant only assigns as error the order of the court entered on 10 May, 1955, overruling his demurrer. Hence, the ruling of the court below will be upheld.

Affirmed.

WiNBORNE and HiggiNS, JJ., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

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

Workman v. Workman, 89 S.E.2d 390, 242 N.C. 726, 1955 N.C. LEXIS 663 (N.C. 1955).

89 S.E.2d 390 (Workman v. Workman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mode v. Mode
174 S.E.2d 30 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1970)
Overby v. Overby
158 S.E.2d 799 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1968)
State v. Rorie
128 S.E.2d 229 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1962)
McDaniel v. Quakenbush
105 S.E.2d 94 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1958)
Pruett v. Pruett
100 S.E.2d 296 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1957)
Weavil v. Myers
90 S.E.2d 733 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1956)
Bailey v. Bailey
90 S.E.2d 696 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1956)