midpage

Brown v. . PolkBrown v. . Polk

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Sep 30, 1931
Reporters:
, ,
Before:
Stacy
Stacy, C. J.,

after stating the case: The plea in abatement was properly overruled. Hawkins ‍​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​​​​‌‌‍v. Hughes, 87 N. C., 115. The causes of action are different in the two suits. A final judgment in the action brought in Yanee County would ‍​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​​​​‌‌‍not support a plea of res judicata in the subsequent proceeding instituted in “Warren County. This is one of the tests of identity. Bank v. Broadhurst, 197 N. C., ‍​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​​​​‌‌‍365, 148 S. E., 452. In short, the two suits are unlike: the causes of action are not the same; and the results sought are dissimilar. ‍​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​​​​‌‌‍1 C. J., 56. This renders the plea in abatement bad.

Nothing was said in Construction Co. v. Ice Co., 190 N. C., 580, 130 S. E., 165, or Allen v. ‍​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​​​​‌‌‍Salley, 179 N. C., 147, 101 S. E., 545, which militates against our present position.

Affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Brown v. . Polk
Court Name: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Date Published: Sep 30, 1931
Citations: 201 N.C. 375; 160 S.E. 357; 1931 N.C. LEXIS 249
Court Abbreviation: N.C.
Log In