Arnold v. Howard
Citation | 24 N.C.App. 255,210 S.E.2d 492 |
Decision Date | 18 December 1974 |
Docket Number | No. 7426SC627,7426SC627 |
Parties | Roy ARNOLD, Plaintiff, v. Ronald W. HOWARD and Linda H. Howard, Original Defendants, and James F. CLARDY, Third-Party Defendant. |
Court | North Carolina Court of Appeals |
Lloyd F. Baucom, Charlotte, for original defendants, Ronald W. Howard and Linda H. Howard.
Thomas Ashe Lockhart and Joe C. Young, Charlotte, for third-party defendant, James F. Clardy.
Rule 54(b) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, G.S. § 1A--1, Rule 54(b), is as follows:
(Emphasis added.)
Although the parties have raised no question concerning the matter, we note that the judgment from which the original defendants now purport to appeal adjudicates 'the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties' and that it contains no determination that 'there is no just reason for delay.' Our Rule 54(b) is substantially similar to the Federal Rule 54(b) as that Rule was amended in 1961, and it is therefore appropriate to look to Federal decisions and authorities for guidance in applying our Rule. As those authorities point out, the need for Rule 54(b) arose from the increased opportunity for liberal joinder of claims and parties which the new Rules of Civil Procedure provided. For analysis and discussion of the history and purposes served by Federal Rule 54(b), see 6 Moore's Federal Practice, 54.01 et seq.; 10 Wright and Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, § 2660. As described by the United States Supreme Court, under Rule 54(b) the trial court Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Mackey, 351 U.S. 427, 435, 76 S.Ct. 895, 899, 100 L.Ed. 1297, 1306 (1956). Under the Federal Rule 54(b) as amended in 1961 and under the North...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Oestreicher v. American Nat. Stores, Inc.
...than all the claims are determined unless it is provided in the judgment that there 'is no just reason for delay.' Arnold v. Howard, 24 N.C.App. 255, 210 S.E.2d 492 (1974). Because the Rule 54(b) limitation on appealability is not applicable where other statutes expressly provide otherwise,......
-
Wachovia Realty Investments v. Housing, Inc., 7521SC747
...... In Arnold v. Howard, 24 N.C.App. 255, 210 S.E.2d 492 (1974), the court, in construing G.S. 1A--1, Rule 54(b), ruled that G.S. 1--277 was not a statute ......
-
Harris v. DePencier, 8020SC946
...is immediately appealable only if the trial judge specifies in the order that "there is no just reason for delay." Arnold v. Howard, 24 N.C.App. 255, 210 S.E.2d 492 (1974); see also, Pasour v. Pierce, 46 N.C.App. 636, 265 S.E.2d 652 (1980); Leasing Corp. v. Myers, 46 N.C.App. 162, 265 S.E.2......
-
Narron v. Hardee's Food Systems, Inc., 847DC1127
...and premature. G.S. 1A-1, Rule 54(b); Leasing, Inc. v. Dan-Cleve Corp., 25 N.C.App. 18, 212 S.E.2d 41 (1975); Arnold v. Howard, 24 N.C.App. 255, 210 S.E.2d 492 (1974). However, we believe that a "substantial right" of the plaintiff is affected by the granting of summary judgment, so that th......