Williams v. Denning

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Williams v. Denning, 133 S.E.2d 150 (N.C. 1963)
260 N.C. 539; 1963 N.C. LEXIS 744
Per Curiam

Williams v. Denning

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.

Reference

Full Case Name
JESSE NOAH WILLIAMS and Wife, ELLEN WILLIAMS, T/A SMITHFIELD LIVESTOCK EXCHANGE, INC. v. JOHN N. DENNING, C. L. DENNING and KENNETH WESTBROOK, T/A DENNING-WESTBROOK OIL COMPANY, INC.
Cited By
5 cases
Status
Published