Powell v. Smith, 101.
| Decision Date | 27 September 1939 |
| Docket Number | No. 101.,101. |
| Citation | 4 S.E.2d 524,216 N.C. 242 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | POWELL . v. SMITH et al. |
Transfer Company's demurrer to such answers for misjoinder of causes of action and of parties, V. J. and C. H. Smith, trading and doing business as the Smith's Transfer Company, and another, appeal. Affirmed.
The plaintiff, Edwin Lee Powell, brought this action against V. J. and C. H. Smith, Trading and Doing Business as Smith's Transfer Company, and Vance Church, to recover for a personal injury received through the alleged negligence of the defendants in the operation of a truck, and filed his complaint setting up the cause of action against them. The defendant, Smith's Transfer Company, thereupon, applied to have S. E. Campbell and Miss Christine Wallace joined as parties defendant, filing contemporaneously with the motion a complaint alleging that said Campbell and Miss Wallace were joint tort feasors with this defendant in any negligence which might be found against it, and asking for contribution. Both S. E. Campbell and Christine Wallace answered, setting up cross-actions against the Transfer Company and demanding damages because of its negligence in injuring their properties. The defendant Transfer Company, thereupon, moved to strike out from the answers of Christine Wallace and S. E. Campbell, respectively, the cross-actions or causes of action demanding affirmative relief, and demurred to each of them for misjoinder of causes of action and of parties. The motions to strike were denied and the demurrers overruled, and defendants appealed.
Williams & Cocke, of Asheville, for appellants.
Alvin Kartus, of Asheville, for appellee Christine Wallace.
Heazel, Shuford & Hartshorn, of Asheville, for appellee S. E. Campbell.
The defendant Transfer Company had S. E. Campbell and Christine Wallace brought in as parties for its own convenience and relief and asserted a cause of action against them for contribution as joint tort feasors in case a recovery should be had against the Transfer Company because of its negligence. Each of the defendants countered with an affirmative demand for compensation against the Transfer Company for negligent injury to property. The causes of action grew out of Appeal from Superior Court, Buncombe County; J. W. Pless, Jr., Judge.
Action by Edwin Lee Powell against V. J. and C. H. Smith, trading and doing business as the Smith's Transfer Company, and another, for personal injuries received in an automobile...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Blades v. Southern Ry. Co.
... ... 611, 130 ... S.E. 502; Bargeon v. Transportation Co., 196 N.C ... 776, 147 S.E. 299; Powell v. Smith, 216 N.C. 242, 4 ... S.E.2d 524 ... The ... necessary requirement ... ...
-
Bell v. Lacey
...in the alleged tortuous act. Norris v. Johnson, 246 N.C. 179, 97 S.E.2d 773; Grant v. McGraw, 228 N.C. 745, 46 S.E.2d 849; Powell v. Smith, 216 N.C. 242, 4 S.E.2d 524. Cf. Morgan v. Brooks, 241 N.C. 527, 85 S.E.2d The ruling of the court below, striking out the appellants' cross-action, mus......
-
Norris v. Johnson
...to assert his counterclaim. Morgan v. Brooks, 241 N.C. 527, 85 S.E.2d 869; Grant v. McGraw, 228 N.C. 745, 46 S.E.2d 849; Powell v. Smith, 216 N.C. 242, 4 S.E. 2d 524. Appellant, at the conclusion of plaintiff's evidence, moved for nonsuit on defendant Johnson's cross action. The court was c......
-
Montgomery v. Blades
... ... misjoinder ... The ... defendant Blades relies on Powell v. Smith, 216 N.C ... 242, 4 S.E.2d 524, but that case is distinguishable from the ... case at ... ...