WS BOYD SALES COMPANY v. Seymour

Supreme Court of North Carolina

WS BOYD SALES COMPANY v. Seymour

122 S.E.2d 605, 255 N.C. 714, 1961 N.C. LEXIS 667

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedNovember 22, 1961

Docket452

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 122 S.E.2d 605 (WS BOYD SALES COMPANY v. Seymour) 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

WS BOYD SALES COMPANY v. Seymour, 122 S.E.2d 605, 255 N.C. 714, 1961 N.C. LEXIS 667 (N.C. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

WiNBORNE, C.J.

It will be noted that the complaint in the action in the Currituck County case is set out in the record on this appeal. Comparing it with the complaint in the action brought in the Superior Court of Wake County, it is seen that the two actions pertain to the same subject matter, as found by Judge Mintz. The parties named in the action in Wake County and those named in Currituck County are identical, and constitute actions between the same parties for the same cause. Both are in courts of like jurisdiction. Hence, this action in Wake County, having been brought subsequent to the action in Currituck County, abates. G.S. 1-127. See also McDowell v. Blythe Bros., 236 N.C. 396, 72 S.E. 2d 860.

Decisions of this Court uniformly hold that the pendency of a prior action between the same parties for the same cause of action in a State court of competent jurisdiction works an abatement of a subsequent action either in the same court or in another court of the State having jurisdiction. Therefore, the action of the Superior Court of Wake County in dismissing this action is

Affirmed.

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

WiNBORNE, C.J.

It will be noted that the complaint in the action in the Currituck County case is set out in the record on this appeal. Comparing it with the complaint in the action brought in the Superior Court of Wake County, it is seen that the two actions pertain to the same subject matter, as found by Judge Mintz. The parties named in the action in Wake County and those named in Currituck County are identical, and constitute actions between the same parties for the same cause. Both are in courts of like jurisdiction. Hence, this action in Wake County, having been brought subsequent to the action in Currituck County, abates. G.S. 1-127. See also McDowell v. Blythe Bros., 236 N.C. 396, 72 S.E. 2d 860.

Decisions of this Court uniformly hold that the pendency of a prior action between the same parties for the same cause of action in a State court of competent jurisdiction works an abatement of a subsequent action either in the same court or in another court of the State having jurisdiction. Therefore, the action of the Superior Court of Wake County in dismissing this action is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

122 S.E.2d 605, 255 N.C. 714, 1961 N.C. LEXIS 667, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ws-boyd-sales-company-v-seymour-nc-1961.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack