Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

242 N.C. 122

Ammons v. Layton

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 13, 1955

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1955-04-13

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently February 1956

2 state decisions

Relies on Salley v. Fayetteville Coca-Cola Bottling Co. · Daniel v. Gardner · State v. Cole

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1955-04-13

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

JOHNSON, J.

¶1The essential rules governing appeals from lower court rulings on motions to strike are collected and assembled in Daniel v. Gardner, 240 N.C. 249, 81 S.E. 2d 660. Under application of the prin- . ciples there stated, we conclude it has not been made to appear that the defendant will be prejudiced by the allegations challenged on this appeal. See Ledford v. Transportation Co., 237 N.C. 317, 74 S.E. 2d 653; Hinson v. Britt, 232 N.C. 379, 61 S.E. 2d 185. See also Wright v. Credit Co., 212 N.C. 87, 192 S.E. 844 ; 33 Am. Jur., Libel and Slander, sections 236 and 241.

¶2It is noted that the assignment of error relating to Paragraph 4 of the complaint is not brought forward in the brief. Hence this assignment is treated as abandoned. Rule 28, Rules of Practice in the Supreme Court, 221 N.C. 544; S. v. Cole, 241 N.C. 576, 86 S.E. 2d 203.

¶3*123The order entered below is

¶4Affirmed.

BaRNHIll, C. J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
/242/nc/122 · .json · Public domain