From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Crouse v. York and York v. Crouse

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Nov 1, 1926
135 S.E. 451 (N.C. 1926)

Opinion

(Filed 17 November, 1926.)

APPEAL by George C. York from Shaw, J., at September Term, 1926, of GUILFORD. Affirmed.

Hobgood Alderman and T. J. Hill for appellant.

Frazier Frazier for appellee.


On 28 May, 1926, J. L. Crouse brought suit against George C. York, and on 1 June, 1926, George C. York brought suit against J. L. Crouse. In the first case the defendant York moved to dismiss the action, and his motion was denied; in the second case the defendant Crouse made a motion to dismiss York's action against him, and the motion was allowed. In each instance York excepted and appealed.

His Honor assigned as his reason for dismissing York's action against Crouse that it was begun after the first action was instituted, and that the two suits are between the same parties and involve the same subject-matter, and that the entire controversy can be determined in the action which was first instituted. We concur in the conclusion announced in each case.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Crouse v. York and York v. Crouse

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Nov 1, 1926
135 S.E. 451 (N.C. 1926)
Case details for

Crouse v. York and York v. Crouse

Case Details

Full title:J. L. CROUSE v. GEORGE C. YORK AND GEORGE C. YORK v. J. L. CROUSE

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Nov 1, 1926

Citations

135 S.E. 451 (N.C. 1926)
135 S.E. 451

Citing Cases

McDowell v. Blythe Brothers Co.

The pendency of a prior action between the same parties for the same cause in a State court of competent…

Cameron v. Cameron

dency of a prior action between the same parties for the same cause in a State court of competent…