Temple v. Western Union Tel. Co
| Decision Date | 22 November 1933 |
| Docket Number | No. 390.,390. |
| Citation | 171 S.E. 630,205 N. C. 441 |
| Parties | TEMPLE. v. WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH CO. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Appeal from Superior Court, Wake County; Cranmer, Judge.
Action by J. P. Temple against the Western Union Telegraph Company. From an order striking out an order sustaining defendant's motion to require plaintiff to make his complaint more definite and specific, defendant appeals.
Error.
Civil action to recover damages for failure of defendant to transmit and deposit funds to credit of plaintiff in Wachovia Bank & Trust Company, as per alleged agreement, which caused a number of plaintiff's checks to be refused for payment by said bank.
After the defendant had obtained an extension of time within which to file answer, it lodged a motion to require the plaintiff to make his complaint more definite and specific by setting out the dates, amounts, and payees of checks alleged to have been dishonored, etc., or to furnish the defendant a bill of particulars containing the desired information. This motion was allowed at the April term, 1933.
Thereafter, at the June term, the same Judge presiding, upon motion of plaintiff, the order entered at the April term was stricken out "as having been improvidently granted, " and because "defendant has full and complete remedy under the provisions of C. S. §§ 900, 901, which have reference to examination of adverse parties and witnesses for the purpose of obtaining information upon which to file pleadings."
From this second ruling, the defendant appeals, assigning error.
J. C. Little, of Raleigh, for appellant.
W. T. Shaw and Ruark & Ruark, all of Raleigh, for appellee.
[I] It is the uniform holding that an application for bill of particulars under C. S. § 534, or a motion to require a pleading to be made more definite and certain under C. S. § 537, is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court, and his ruling thereon is not reviewable on appeal, except perhaps in case of manifest abuse of discretion. Curteret County v. Construction Corp., 199 N. C. 485, 154 S. E. 746; Gruber v. Ewbanks, 199 N. C. 335, 154 S. E. 318; Elizabeth City Water & Power Co. v. Elizabeth City, 188 N. C. 278, 124 S. E. 611.
The law is stated in 49 C. J, 625, as follows: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
North Carolina Corporation Commission v. United Commercial Bank
... ... v. Hawkins, 211 N.C. 283, 189 S.E. 774," it is written ... in Temple v. Western Union Telegraph Co., 205 N.C ... 441, 171 S.E. 630, 631, "It ... ...
-
North Carolina Corp. Comm'n v. Bank
...State v. Lea, 203 N.C. 316, 166 S.E. 292; Dail v. Hawkins, 211 N.C. 283, 189 S.E. 774, " it is written in Temple v. Western Union Telegraph Co., 205 N.C. 441, 171 S.E. 630, 631, "It is likewise settled by the decisions that the principle of res judicata does not extend to ordinary motions i......
-
Calloway v. Ford Motor Co.
...It is frequently said that the doctrine does not apply unless the order involves 'a substantial right.' Temple v. Western Union Telegraph Co., 205 N.C. 441, 442, 171 S.E. 630 (1933). See 5 N.C. Index 2d Judgments § 37 (1968). Accordingly, the rule is that a judge has the power to modify an ......
-
Pemberton v. City of Greensboro
... ... may be doubted whether it is appealable. C. S. § 534; ... Temple v. Western Union Telegraph Co., 205 N.C. 441, ... 171 S.E. 630; Townsend ... ...