Miller v. Smith
C. E. MILLER v. S. M. SMITH Et Al.
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
BeowN, J.
The complaint alleges that the defendants are indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of $1,387.39, with interest thereon from 15 November, 1913, due for goods, wares, and merchandise sold and delivered, and for board of employees, and for goods, wares, and merchandise sold and delivered to employees on orders from time to time from 1 August, 1913, to 1 March, 1914, which sums for board, merchandise, and orders the said defendants contracted and agreed to pay at the prices charged; that there is due on said account, after deducting all credits to which the defendants are entitled, the sum of $1,387.39, with interest from 15 November, 1913. The language of this complaint is plain and unambiguous. It alleges a distinct promise to pay at the prices charged.
Upon all the authorities, the plaintiff was entitled to a judgment by default final upon the failure to answer within the time required by law.
Hartman v. Farior, 95 N. C., 177 ;
Witt v. Long, 93 N. C., 388 .
In addition, his Honor not only finds facts which fail to show excusable neglect for failure to file the answer, but he also finds that the defendants have no meritorious or valid defense to the cause of action set out in the complaint.
Jeffries v. Aaron, 120 N. C., 169 .
The judgment is Affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 6 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.