Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

192 N.C. 503

135 S.E 327

Taylor v. . Gentry

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 10, 1926

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1926-11-10

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including R. R. v. . McGuire

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1926-11-10

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently January 1954

2 state decisions

101926193019401950decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Stacy, C. J.

¶1 Plaintiff obtained judgment by default final in tbe recorder’s court of tbe town of Reidsville on 13 October, 1925. Tbis was set aside fourteen days thereafter, on motion of tbe defendant, on tbe ground of “mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect,” under O. S., 600. On appeal by tbe plaintiff to tbe Superior Court tbe order setting aside tbe judgment in tbe recorder’s court was affirmed.

¶2 Plaintiff takes two positions: First, that tbe recorder’s court was without authority to entertain tbe motion, and, as tbe Superior Court could exercise derivative jurisdiction only, it was also without authority to decide tbe question. Sewing Machine Co. v. Burger, 181 N. C., 241. Second, that on tbe facts found, tbe defendant is not entitled to have tbe judgment vacated or set aside.

¶3 Without passing upon tbe merits of tbe first position, we deem it sufficient to say that there is no allegation or finding of a meritorious defense. . It is useless to set aside a judgment where there is no real or substantial defense on tbe merits. Land Co. v. Wooten, 177 N. C., 248; Norton v. McLaurin, 125 N. C., 185. “One who asks to be relieved *504 from a judgment on the ground of excusable neglect must show merit, as otherwise the court would be asked to do the vain thing of setting aside a judgment when it would be its duty to enter again the same judgment on motion of the adverse party.” Allen, J., in Crumpler v. Mines, 174 N. C., 283.

¶4 On the record, there was error in setting aside the judgment.

¶5 Reversed.

/192/nc/503 · .json · Public domain