Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1860

Hannah v. . Ingram

Hannah v. . Ingram
Supreme Court of North Carolina · Decided December 5, 1860 · Manly
53 N.C. 55

Hannah v. . Ingram

Opinion of the Court

*56 Manly, J.

The power to bring an action for words is limited by the Revised Code, ch. 65, sec. 3, to six months , after the speaking of themand the question presented here is : At what time was this action commenced ? "When the first writ was issued? Or when the last?

We concur with his Honor below, that it was at the issuing of the last writ — the one from the Fall Term, 1857, to the following-spring. This latter, although denominated an alias, does not connect itself with the other, so as to make one continuous suit, a term having intervened from which no process was issued. In the case of Fullbright v. Tritt, 2 Dev. and Bat. 491, it was held that such a failure under precisely similar circumstances, worked a discontmuanoe of the suit and the issuing of a writ, purporting to be an alias, at the subsequent ■term, was the beginning of a new suit. The case of Fullbright v. Tritt is in point, and is satisfactory to us. It decides the cause before us in accordance with the opinion of the ■Judge below-, and his judgment should, therefore, be affirmed.

Per Curiam,

Judgment affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.