{
  "id": 2219476,
  "name": "W. L. CLEMENTS and Wife, KATE CLEMENTS, v. O. B. SIMMONS and Wife, FRANCES DAVIS SIMMONS",
  "name_abbreviation": "Clements v. Simmons",
  "decision_date": "1956-09-26",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "523",
  "last_page": "524",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "244 N.C. 523"
    }
  ],
  "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": "242 N.C. 766",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 167,
    "char_count": 2059,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.566,
    "sha256": "1fc1cdb8c7698eac159bd9035c617d95bda2ee998e4bff48551531b0112bed09",
    "simhash": "1:ff0c8fe2ca4ce07f",
    "word_count": 343
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:53:24.689887+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Johnson, J., not sitting."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "W. L. CLEMENTS and Wife, KATE CLEMENTS, v. O. B. SIMMONS and Wife, FRANCES DAVIS SIMMONS."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThis Court, after the first day of the Spring Term 1956, will not entertain an appeal \u201cfrom an order overruling a demurrer except when the demurrer is interposed as a matter of right for misjoinder of parties and causes of action.\u201d Rule 4(a) of the Rules of the Supreme Court, 242 N.C. 766. The demurrer here is not for a misjoinder of parties and causes. The defendants\u2019 attempted appeal is dismissed by virtue of Rule 4(a).\nAppeal dismissed.\nJohnson, J., not sitting.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Roy A. Taylor and Don C. Young for Plaintiffs, Appellees.",
      "Harkins, Van Winkle, Walton & Buck for Defendants, Appellants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "W. L. CLEMENTS and Wife, KATE CLEMENTS, v. O. B. SIMMONS and Wife, FRANCES DAVIS SIMMONS.\n(Filed 26 September, 1956.)\nAppeal and Error \u00a7 3\u2014\nAn appeal will not lie from the overruling of a demurrer for misjoinder of causes or failure of the complaint to state facts sufficient to constitute causes of action, and an attempted appeal therefrom will be dismissed. Rule of Practice in the Supreme Court No. 4(a).\nJohnson, J., not sitting.\nAppeal by defendants from Froneberger, J.; Regular May Civil Term 1956 of Buncombe.\nCivil action to have Brookside Avenue, as shown on the plat of the development and subdivision called Mountain View Development, which plat is recorded in Plat Book No. 2, p. 41, in the Register of Deeds\u2019 Office of Buncombe County, declared a public street, and. that the defendants be required to remove the fence, or fences, they have erected across it obstructing plaintiffs\u2019 right to use said avenue. -In their brief the plaintiffs assert that the allegations in their complaint as to the discontinuance of a permissive roadway across their property were never intended to allege a cause of action, but were a surplus embellishment-of their pleading. .\nThe-defendants demurred to the complaint thereto on three grounds: one, a defect of parties defendant; two, a misjoinder of -causes; and three, the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.\nThe demurrer was overruled, and the defendants appealed.\nRoy A. Taylor and Don C. Young for Plaintiffs, Appellees.\nHarkins, Van Winkle, Walton & Buck for Defendants, Appellants."
  },
  "file_name": "0523-01",
  "first_page_order": 569,
  "last_page_order": 570
}