TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

White Way Laundry, Inc. v. Underwood

WHITE WAY LAUNDRY, INC., and S. T. INGRAM and R. B. LEMMOND v. W. D. UNDERWOOD, Trading Under the Firm Name of W. D. UNDERWOOD COMPANY, and A. B. FARQUHAR COMPANY, LIMITED

White Way Laundry, Inc. v. Underwood, 16 S.E.2d 703 (N.C. 1941)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of North Carolina · State Highest Courts
Decided
October 8, 1941
Judges
WiNBOrne
Citations
16 S.E.2d 703220 N.C. 1521941 N.C. LEXIS 493

Opinion of the Court — WiNBOrne

WiNBOrne, J.

Appellant challenges the authority of Stevens, J., after adjournment of January-Eebruary Term, 1941, of Superior Court of Lee County, and when in another district, to find facts upon which to hold, and to adjudge that, after the entry of the order from which plaintiffs had appealed to Supreme Court, appellant had made a general appearance in the cause, thereby rendering moot the question involved on appeal by plaintiffs then pending. The uniform decisions of this Court sustain the challenge.

Branch v. Walker, 92 N. C., 87 ;

Delafield v. Construction Co., 115 N. C., 21 , 20 S. E., 167 ;

May v. Ins. Co., 172 N. C., 795 , 90 S. E., 890 ;

Dunn v. Taylor, 187 N. C., 385 , 121 S. E., 659 ;

Bisanar v. Suttlemyre, 193 N. C., 711 , 138 S. E., 1 ;

S. v. Crowder, 195 N. C., 335 , 142 S. E., 222 ;

Turnage v. Dunn, 196 N. C., 105 , 144 S. E., 521 ;

Drug Co. v. Patterson, 198 N. C., 548 , 152 S. E., 632 ;

Hinnant v. Ins. Co., 204 N. C., 307 , 168 S. E., 206 ;

Pendergraph v. Davis, 205 N. C., 29 , 169 S. E., 815 ;

Bank v. Hagaman, 208 N. C., 191 , 179 S. E., 759 , and others.

In Bisanar v. Suttlemyre, supra, the Court said: “It is the uniform ' holding in this jurisdiction that, except by consent, or unless authorized by statute, a judge of the Superior Court, even in his own district, has no authority to hear a cause, or to make an order substantially affecting the rights of the parties, outside of the county in which the action is pending,” citing numerous decisions.

While it is provided by statute, O'. S., 644, that when the judge from whose ruling appeal is taken to Supreme Court, has left the district before notice of disagreement as to case on appeal, he may settle the case *155 on appeal without returning to tbe district, be bas no authority to do more, except by consent, which is lacking in the present case.

In this connection the Court, in accordance with a well established principle (S. v. R. R., 141 N. C., 846 , 54 S. E., 294 ), takes judicial notice of the political subdivisions of the State, and notes that Lee County, where the present action is pending, is in the Fourth Judicial District, and that Warsaw, where the order of Stevens, J., was made, is in Duplin County in the Sixth Judicial District.

The decision here is without prejudice to the rights of the parties on hearing of question when and if presented at appropriate time and place before a judge authorized to act.

Beversed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1942: 11947: 11949: 11973: 119422026peak 1942 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Mallard v. Housing Authority20 S.E.2d 281 (N.C. 1942)
  2. Patterson v. Patterson53 S.E.2d 658 (N.C. 1949)
  3. Grady v. Parker44 S.E.2d 449 (N.C. 1947)
  4. State v. Pallet198 S.E.2d 433 (N.C. 1973)

Most recent

  1. State v. Pallet198 S.E.2d 433 (N.C. 1973)
  2. Patterson v. Patterson53 S.E.2d 658 (N.C. 1949)
  3. Grady v. Parker44 S.E.2d 449 (N.C. 1947)
  4. Mallard v. Housing Authority20 S.E.2d 281 (N.C. 1942)

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 14

DepthCaseCited by
Bisanar v. Suttlemyre, 138 S.E. 1 (N.C. 1927) 27
State v. R. R., 54 S.E. 294 (N.C. 1906) 29
Delafield v. Lewis Mercer Constr. Co., 20 S.E. 167 (N.C. 1894) 18
Dunn v. Taylor, 121 S.E. 659 (N.C. 1924) 9
May v. Nat'l Fire Ins., 90 S.E. 890 (N.C. 1916) 7
State v. Crowder, 142 S.E. 222 (N.C. 1928) 5
Turnage v. Dunn, 144 S.E. 521 (N.C. 1928) 3
Union Nat'l Bank v. Hagaman, 179 S.E. 759 (N.C. 1935) 3
Branch v. Walker, 92 N.C. 87 (1885) 31
Drug Co. v. Patterson, 152 S.E. 632 (N.C. 1930) 3
Pendergraph v. Davis, 169 S.E. 815 (N.C. 1933) 2
Hinnant v. Ins. Co., 168 S.E. 199 (N.C. 1933) 2
Barefoot v. Ins. Co., 168 S.E. 206 (N.C. 1933) 1

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