{ "id": 8607870, "name": "BEULAH LAWING, as Guardian for Her Two Minor Children, viz.: JOHN LAWING and DAN LAWING, and Also in Her Individual Right, and KARL LANDER LAWING and AGNES LANDER LAWING, in Their Individual Rights, v. A. C. WHEELER and Wife, VIRGINIA WHEELER", "name_abbreviation": "Lawing v. Wheeler", "decision_date": "1950-10-18", "docket_number": "", "first_page": "517", "last_page": "518", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "232 N.C. 517" } ], "court": { "name_abbreviation": "N.C.", "id": 9292, "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina" }, "jurisdiction": { "id": 5, "name_long": "North Carolina", "name": "N.C." }, "cites_to": [ { "cite": "19 S.E. 2d 247", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.2d", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "221 N.C. 137", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8626523 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/221/0137-01" ] }, { "cite": "47 S.E. 2d 614", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.2d", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "229 N.C. 52", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 12164609 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/229/0052-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 246, "char_count": 3430, "ocr_confidence": 0.488, "pagerank": { "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08, "percentile": 0.20715203859375586 }, "sha256": "181457fd1f63b5df8e598ec0b117e5d8342e3fe159633c583374320fedb3cab3", "simhash": "1:b71d766b93f5faf0", "word_count": 585 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:42:59.145817+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [], "parties": [ "BEULAH LAWING, as Guardian for Her Two Minor Children, viz.: JOHN LAWING and DAN LAWING, and Also in Her Individual Right, and KARL LANDER LAWING and AGNES LANDER LAWING, in Their Individual Rights, v. A. C. WHEELER and Wife, VIRGINIA WHEELER." ], "opinions": [ { "text": "PaeNhill, J.\nAn inspection of the record renders it quite apparent that the further answer of defendant Yirginia Wheeler fails to state a cause of action. Sbe denies that she -claims any rights under the lease contract. She does not assert the falsity of the statements alleged to have been made by plaintiffs or that they adversely affected any rights she possesses, but that they were uttered in derogation of the rights and to the hurt of defendant A. C. Wheeler. She may not recover for any injury suffered by her codefendant.\nWhile the cross action of defendant A. C. Wheeler is likewise materially defective, we may concede, without deciding, that it is sufficient to state \u00e1 cause of action. Even so, it is bottomed on a separate, independent tort. It may not be pleaded as a counterclaim in this action. Hancammon v. Carr, 229 N.C. 52, 47 S.E. 2d 614, and cases cited; Wingler v. Miller, 221 N.C. 137, 19 S.E. 2d 247.\nThe subject is fully discussed in the Hancammon case. What is said there is pertinent here. Mere repetition of the same principles of law will serve no useful purpose. Suffice it to say that the tort this defendant attempts to allege does not constitute a cause of action pleadable by way of cross action to plaintiffs\u2019 action founded on alleged breach of contract.\nThe judgment is\nAffirmed.", "type": "majority", "author": "PaeNhill, J." } ], "attorneys": [ "A. L. Quickel and M. T. Leatherman for plaintiff appellees.", "Childs & Childs for defendant appellants." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "BEULAH LAWING, as Guardian for Her Two Minor Children, viz.: JOHN LAWING and DAN LAWING, and Also in Her Individual Right, and KARL LANDER LAWING and AGNES LANDER LAWING, in Their Individual Rights, v. A. C. WHEELER and Wife, VIRGINIA WHEELER.\n(Filed 18 October, 1950.)\n1. Pleadings \u00a7 10\u2014\nOne defendant may not' set up a cross action for alleged injury suffered by ber codefendant.\n2. Same\u2014\nIn an action in ejectment and to recover damages for breach of lease contract, defendant may not set up a cross action for slander of his title, since such cross action is based upon a separate, independent tort.\nAppeal by defendants from Bobbitt, J., July Term, 1950, LiNcolN.\nCivil action in ejectment and to recover damages for breach of lease contract, beard on demurrers to the separate cross actions pleaded by defendants.\nPlaintiffs allege a lease to defendant A. 0. Wheeler of certain hotel property and breach thereof by said defendant in three respects: (1) failure to pay the stipulated rent; (2) failure to-paint and repair the buildings; and (3)-the s.ubletting of portions of the-building to defendant Yirginia Wheeler and others, in violation of the terms of the agreement. They join Mrs. Wheeler as codefendant on the allegation that she has subleased and is now in possession of a part of the property. They pray possession of the buildings and damages for the breach of the contract.\nDefendant Yirginia Wheeler denies that she is a sublessee and pleads an alleged cross action for slander of the title of defendant A. C. Wheeler \u201cwith reckless disregard of the co-defendant, A. 0. Wheeler\u2019s rights.\u201d\nDefendant A. C. Wheeler likewise pleads the same cross action in substantially identical language.\nPlaintiffs filed a demurrer to each cross action for that (1) such cross action fails to state a cause of action; and (2) even if a cause of action is stated, it is not germane to the plaintiffs\u2019 cause of action and is not pleadable in this action. Each demurrer was sustained and defendants appealed.\nA. L. Quickel and M. T. Leatherman for plaintiff appellees.\nChilds & Childs for defendant appellants." }, "file_name": "0517-01", "first_page_order": 565, "last_page_order": 566 }