From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ammons v. Layton

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Apr 1, 1955
86 S.E.2d 915 (N.C. 1955)

Opinion

Filed 13 April, 1955.

1. Appeal and Error 40f — The denial of defendant's motion to strike certain allegations from the complaint will not be disturbed on appeal when it is not made to appear that defendant is prejudiced by the allegations challenged.

2. Appeal and Error 29 — An assignment of error not brought forward in the brief is deemed abandoned.

APPEAL by defendant from Martin, Special Judge, at September Civil Term, 1954, of HARNETT.

Taylor, Spence Taylor and Douglass McMillan for plaintiff, appellee.

Wilson Johnson and Clem B. Holding for defendant, appellant.


BARNHILL, C.J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.


Civil action for slander.

The defendant, before answering or otherwise pleading, moved to strike all of Paragraphs 4 and 5 and portions of Paragraphs 6 to 13, inclusive, of the complaint. The court ruled that certain portions of Paragraphs 5, 6, 12, and 13 should be stricken, but that otherwise the motion should be denied.

To the order entered in accordance with the foregoing ruling, the defendant excepted so far as the motion to strike was overruled in any part, and appealed.


The essential rules governing appeals from lower court rulings on motions to strike are collected and assembled in Daniel v. Gardner, 240 N.C. 249, 81 S.E.2d 660. Under application of the principles there stated, we conclude it has not been made to appear that the defendant will be prejudiced by the allegations challenged on this appeal. See Ledford v. Transportation Co., 237 N.C. 317, 74 S.E.2d 653; Hinson v. Britt, 232 N.C. 379, 61 S.E.2d 185. See also Wright v. Credit Co., 212 N.C. 87, 192 S.E. 844; 33 Am.Jur., Libel and Slander, sections 236 and 241.

It is noted that the assignment of error relating to Paragraph 4 of the complaint is not brought forward in the brief. Hence this assignment is treated as abandoned. Rule 28, Rules of Practice in the Supreme Court, 221 N.C. 544; S. v. Cole, 241 N.C. 576, 86 S.E.2d 203.

The order entered below is

Affirmed.

BARNHILL, C.J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.


Summaries of

Ammons v. Layton

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Apr 1, 1955
86 S.E.2d 915 (N.C. 1955)
Case details for

Ammons v. Layton

Case Details

Full title:C. R. AMMONS v. JOEL G. LAYTON, JR

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Apr 1, 1955

Citations

86 S.E.2d 915 (N.C. 1955)
86 S.E.2d 915

Citing Cases

Cudworth v. Insurance Co.

The appellant's brief as to the two questions discussed in its brief does not conform with Rule 28, Rules of…