TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

McMinn v. Hamilton

Nathan McMinn v. S.W. Hamilton, Administrator.

McMinn v. Hamilton, 77 N.C. 300 (1877)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of North Carolina · State Highest Courts
Decided
June 5, 1877
Judges
Eairoloth
Citations
77 N.C. 300
Headnotes
Jurisdiction — Venue—Pleading. If a Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter of an action and the venue is wrong, the objection must he taken in apt time. If the defendant pleads to the merits of the action, he will be deemed to have waited the objection.
Summary
Appeal from an Order dismissing the Action, made at Spring Term, 1877, of Transylvania Superior Court, by Henry, J. Erom the 'case agreed and the record, the following facts appear: The plaintiff brought an action against the defendant in his representative character for $70.35 before a Justice of the Peace in said County where both parties reside. The defendant obtained letters of administration and filed his official bond in Henderson County. The defendant appeared before the Justice and pleaded payment and statute of limitations. Evidence was heard and judgment was rendered for the plaintiff, from, which the' defendant appealed. In the Superior Court he filed a demurrer, not to the jurisdiction, but on other grounds ; and made a motion at the same term to dismiss the action for want of jurisdiction. The plaintiff declined to remove the case by consent and His Honor dismissed the action. Erom which order the plaintiff appealed.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Eairoloth

Eairoloth, J.

(After stating the facts as above.) Where a Court has no jurisdiction of the subject matter, the objection can be taken at any time, and indeed as soon as thi$ fact is discovered, the Court mero motu will take notice of it and dismiss the action. But if it has jurisdiction of the subject matter and the venue is wrong, the objection must be taken in apt time ; and if the defendant pleads to the merits of the action, he will be taken to have waived the objection. He cannot have two chances.

Applying this principle to the case before us, we think the defendant waived the objection by pleading before the Justice and that it was then too late to raise it.

Error.

PER, CURIAM. Judgment reversed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 14 cases

View all citing references →
1879–1880: 11883–1884: 11889–1890: 11893–1894: 11895–1896: 11903–1904: 21907–1908: 21915–1916: 11919–1920: 11925–1926: 12021–2022: 218792026peak 1903 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Clark v. Homes128 S.E. 20 (N.C. 1925)
  2. Fields v. Maloney78 Mo. 172 (1883) · Dissent
  3. Granville County Board of Education v. State Board of Education10 S.E. 1002 (N.C. 1890)
  4. Farnsworth v. Union Pac. Coal Co.89 P. 74 (Utah 1907)
  5. Devereux v. Devereux81 N.C. 12 (1879)
  6. Albuquerque & Cerrillos Coal Co. v. Lermuseaux187 P. 560 (N.M. 1920)

Most recent

  1. In re M.R.J.No. 37A21 (N.C. Sept. 24, 2021)
  2. In re M.R.J.No. 37A21 (N.C. Sept. 24, 2021)
  3. Clark v. Homes128 S.E. 20 (N.C. 1925)
  4. Albuquerque & Cerrillos Coal Co. v. Lermuseaux187 P. 560 (N.M. 1920)
  5. Brown v. Harding86 S.E. 1010 (N.C. 1915)
  6. McArthur v. Griffith61 S.E. 519 (N.C. 1908)

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.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list