Wilson v. Hoyle, 665
| Decision Date | 16 December 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 665,665 |
| Citation | 139 S.E.2d 206,263 N.C. 194 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | Sherman WILSON and wife, Earline Wilson, v. T. C. HOYLE, Jr., Trustee, Cameron-Brown Company, A. N. McCoy and wife, Ernestine McCoy, American Federal Savings & Loan Association, and J. Kenneth Lee, Trustee. |
Hines & Dettor, Greensboro, for plaintiff appellants.
Bethea, Robinson & Moore, Reidsville. for defendant appellees.
It was appropriate for Judge Gambill, in the exercise of the discretion, to determine the plea of res judicata, a plea in bar, prior to trial on the merits of plaintiffs' alleged cause of action. Jones v. Mathis, 254 N.C. 421, 425, 119 S.E.2d 200, and cases cited.
In our view, the record does not support plaintiffs' contention that Judge Gambill entered judgment on the pleadings. The stipulations referred to in the judgment establish the identity of parties and of subject matter in the two actions. The judgment refers to and quotes from Judge Crissman's judgment in the prior action. It contains a finding of fact that Judge Crissman's said judgment resolved the issue of title raised in the prior action by adjudicating defendants McCoy to be the owners in fee simple of the subject lands. Plaintiffs did not except to any recital, stipulation or finding of fact set forth in Judge Gambill's judgment. It is manifest the hearing before Judge Gambill was on the pleadings herein, the judgment roll in the prior action and the stipulations as to identity of parties and subject matter.
Judge Crissman's judgment of November 26, 1962, in the record before us, discloses that the cause of action alleged by plaintiffs in the prior action was an attack on the deed of trust recorded in Book 564, page 271, said Registry, executed by W. C. Falkener and wife, Margaret E. Falkener, and on the regularity of the foreclosure thereof by J. Kenneth Lee, Trustee; and that defendants McCoy asserted title and right to possession under deed executed and delivered by J. Kenneth Lee, Trustee, to A. N. McCoy pursuant to said foreclosure. Judge Crissman adjudged the validity of said deed of trust to J. Kenneth Lee, Trustee, and the validity of the foreclosure thereof, 'and that the deed from J. Kenneth Lee, Trustee, to A. N. McCoy conveyed complete and legal title to said property to A. N. McCoy and that the plaintiffs Sherman Wilson and wife, Georgia Earline Wilson, own no interest in said property.' (Note: Subsequently, the subject lands were conveyed by deed dated November 29, 1961, recorded in Book 576, [263 N.C. 198] page 84, said Registry, executed and delivered by A. N. McCoy to A. N. McCoy and wife, Ernestine B. McCoy.) It was also ordered that the Sheriff of Rockingham County immediately eject plaintiffs from the subject lands and put defendants McCoy in possession thereof. It was also ordered that 'the matter of determining what damages, if any, the defendants, A. N. McCoy and wife, Ernestine McCoy are entitled to receive from the plaintiffs is hereby continued to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Stewart v. Hunt
...all matters properly within the scope of the pleadings which could and should have been adjudicated at that time. See Wilson v. Hoyle, 263 N.C. 194, 139 S.E.2d 206 (1964); Hayes v. Ricard, 251 N.C. 485, 112 S.E.2d 123 (1960); Worthington v. Wooten, 242 N.C. 88, 86 S.E.2d 767 (1955); Abernet......
-
Painter v. Wake County Bd. of Ed.
...pleadings which could and should have been brought forward. In re Trucking Co., 285 N.C. 552, 206 S.E.2d 172 (1974); Wilson v. Hoyle, 263 N.C. 194, 139 S.E.2d 206 (1964); Hayes v. Ricard, 251 N.C. 485, 112 S.E.2d 123 (1960); Worthington v. Wooten, 242 N.C. 88, 86 S.E.2d 767 As we said in Gi......
-
Powell v. Cross
...the merits, not to a judgment of involuntary nonsuit entered on account of the insufficiency of plaintiff's evidence. Wilson v. Hoyle, 263 N.C. 194, 139 S.E.2d 206, relied on by defendants, is factually distinguishable, in that it is stated in the opinion, 'The stipulations referred to in t......
-
Garner v. Garner, 528
...nor divide the grounds of recovery.' (Emphasis ours) See also Gaither Corp. v. Skinner, 241 N.C. 532, 85 S.E.2d 909, and Wilson v. Hoyle, 263 N.C. 194, 139 S.E.2d 206. In the instant case plaintiff filed verified pleadings on 12 October 1965, stating 'that the plaintiff abandoned the cross-......