Harris Clay Co. v. Carolina China Clay Co.
Cases that cite this one
5 later published cases cite this decision.
- Mueller v. Brunn (Wis. 1982)
- Wheatley v. Phillips (District Court, W.D. North Carolina 1964)
- Fulcher v. Smith (N.C. 1959)
- Cox v. Oakdale Cotton Mills, Inc. (N.C. 1937)
- Harris Clay Co. v. Carolina China Clay Co. (N.C. 1933)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The case turns on whether the action is local or transitory in its nature. If local, the defendants are entitled to have the cause moved to Mitchell County for trial as a matter of right. C. S., 463. If transitory, the motion for change of venue was properly overruled. Causey v. Morris, 195 N. C., 532, 142 S. E., 783.
The action 'is for the recovery of damages and appears to be a transitory one. It sounds in neither ejectment nor replevin; nor is it an action for injury to real property, such as contemplated by the statute above cited. Eames v. Armstrong, 136 N. C., 392, 48 S. E., 769; McIntosh, N. C. Practice & Procedure, 258.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.