Fletcher Lumber Co v. Wilson Comm'rs, 167.
| Decision Date | 30 September 1942 |
| Docket Number | No. 167.,167. |
| Citation | 222 N.C. 87,21 S.E.2d. 893 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | FLETCHER LUMBER CO. v. WILSON et al. Commissioners. |
Appeal from Superior Court, Henderson County; H. Hoyle Sink, Judge.
Action by the Fletcher Lumber Company against A. E. Wilson and C. L. Wilson, as Commissioners and individually, to recover alleged overpayments made by plaintiff to the defendants upon a contract of sale and purchase of timber, and to recover damages for alleged hindrance and delay in the performance of such contract caused by the wrongful acts of the defendants. From a judgment sustaining defendants' demurrers to the complaint, plaintiff appeals.
Judgment affirmed.
This is an action instituted in Henderson County to recover alleged overpayments made by the plaintiff to the defendants upon a contract of sale and purchase of timber entered into in Yancey County by the defendants and plaintiff, and to recover damages for alleged hindrance and delay in the performance of said contract caused by the wrongful acts of the defendants.
In the complaint reference is made to an Ex Parte Special Proceeding pending in the Superior Court of Yancey County entitled "A. E. Wilson and C. L. Wilson, Administrators of the Estate of A. G. Wilson, deceased; Mrs. C. J. Wilson, widow of A. G. Wilson, Emma Hensley et al, heirs at law of A. G. Wilson, petitioners, Ex Parte", and in the complaint reference is made to a contract of sale and purchase of timber between A. E. Wilson and C. L. Wilson, Commissioners, and the plaintiff, the Fletcher Lumber Company.
The defendants, as commissioners, demur to the complaint upon the ground that there was "another action pending between the same parties for the same cause". C. S. § 511(3).
The defendants, as individuals, demur to the complaint upon the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to state a cause of action against them as individuals. C. S § 511(6).
To judgment sustaining both demurrers the plaintiff preserved exception, and appealed.
J. W. Haynes, of Asheville, and Dover R. Fouts, of Burnsville, for appellant.
Anglin & Randolph, of Burnsville, and J. Scroop Styles, of Asheville, for appellees.
The reference made in the complaint to the Special Proceeding pending in Yancey County in effect incorporated that proceeding into this case. Alexander v. Norwood, 118 N.C. 381, 24 S.E. 119. The contract which is the basis of the cause of action alleged in the complaint is also the basis of the controversy involved...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McDowell v. Blythe Bros. Co.
...complaint. Reece v. Reece, 231 N.C. 321, 56 S.E.2d 641; Dwiggins v. Parkway Bus Co., 230 N.C. 234, 52 S.E.2d 892; Fletcher Lumber Co. v. Wilson, 222 N.C. 87, 21 S.E.2d 893; Thompson v. Virginia & C. S. R. R. Co., 216 N.C. 554, 6 S.E.2d 38; Johnson v. Smith, 215 N.C. 322, 1 S.E.2d 834; Reed ......
-
Cameron v. Cameron
...to parties, subject matter, issues involved, and relief demanded? Whitehurst v. Hinton, 230 N.C. 16, 51 S.E.2d 899; Fletcher Lumber Co. v. Wilson, 222 N.C. 87, 21 S.E.2d 893; Redfearn v. Austin, 88 N.C. 413; Casey v. Harrison, 13 N.C. 244. This test lends itself to ready application where b......
-
Reece v. Reece
...answer. Alexander v. Norwood, 118 N.C. 381, 24 S.E. 119; Reed v. Carolina Mortgage Co., 207 N.C. 27, 175 S.E. 834; Fletcher Lumber Co. v. Wilson, 222 N.C. 87, 21 S.E.2d 893; Moore v. Moore, 224 N.C. 552, 31 S.E.2d 690. Even so, plaintiff admitted the pendency of the divorce action. The cour......
-
Hill v. Hill Spinning Co.
...tanto at least, to a recovery by the other.' In accord with J. A. Jones Construction Co. v. Hamlet Ice Co., supra; Fletcher Lumber Co. v. Wilson, 222 N.C. 87, 21 S.E.2d 893; Garrett v. Kendrick, 201 N.C. 388, 160 S.E. 349; Savage v. McGlawhorn, 199 N.C. 427, 154 S.E. 673; Bell v. Mutual Mac......