Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

238 N.C. 142

76 S.E.2d 162

Chambers v. Dalton

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 12, 1953

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1953-06-12

Relies on Shaw v. . Barnard · Davis v. . Whitehurst · Burleson v. . Burleson

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1953-06-12

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently February 1992

2 federal appellate · 16 state decisions

9019531960197019801990decided

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 →

Per, Curiam.

¶1 Tbe judgment entered is somewhat novel in that it is decreed that the complaint fails to state a cause of action and at the same time it is adjudged that there is a misjoinder of parties and causes. Shaw v. Barnard, 229 N.C. 713, 51 S.E. 2d 295. Be that as it may, the judgment entered must be affirmed. The several causes of action the plaintiffs seek to state are separate and distinct. The only relation of the one to the others is that they are all of the same nature and assert the same general type of grievance. Davis v. Whitehurst, 229 N.C. 226, 49 S.E. 2d 394; Burleson v. Burleson, 217 N.C. 336, 7 S.E. 2d 706. No one cause affects all the parties to the action. Lucas v. Bank, 206 N.C. 909, 174 S.E. 301. No one group has any interest in the claims asserted by the others. Therefore, if any cause of action is stated, there is clearly a mis-joinder of parties and causes.

¶2 The judgment entered in the court below is

¶3 Affirmed.

/238/nc/142 · .json · Public domain