midpage

Abernethy v. . BurnsAbernethy v. . Burns

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Apr 11, 1934
Reporters:
, ,
Before:
Stacy
Stacy, C. J.

It was clearly within the discretion of the court, for cause shown, to place the case at ‍​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‍the end of the trial docket. But it is provided by C. S., 401 that a party may appear “either in person or by attorney in actions or proceedings in which he is interested.” Thus, the ‍​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‍provision requiring plaintiff to employ counsel would seem to be at variance with the statute.

It is the general holding that a party has the right to appear in propria persona or by counsel. This right is alternative. A ‍​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‍party has no right to appear both by himself and by counsel. Nor should he be *371 permitted ex gratia to do so. Talbot v. Talbot‘s Reps., 25 Marshall’s Reports (Ky.), 3; Comrs. v. Younger, 29 Cal., 147, 87 Am. Dec., 164, and note; 4 ‍​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‍C. J., 1322; 2 R. C. L., 937.

In the instant case, the plaintiff prefers “to go it alone.” This is bis right. He may not get to first base, but he is entitled to come to ‍​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‍the bat.

The order will be modified as indicated, and, as thus modified, it will be affirmed.

Modified and affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Abernethy v. . Burns
Court Name: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Date Published: Apr 11, 1934
Citations: 206 N.C. 370; 173 S.E. 899; 1934 N.C. LEXIS 188
Court Abbreviation: N.C.
Log In