Where the action is against two or more defendants, and the summons is served on one or more, but not on all of them, the plaintiff may proceed as follows:
(1) If the action is against defendants jointly indebted upon contract, he may proceed against the defendants served, unless the court otherwise directs, and if he recovers judgment it may be entered against all the defendants thus jointly indebted, so far only as that it may be enforced against the joint property of all and the separate property of the defendants served, and if they are subject to arrest, against the persons of the defendants served.
(2) If the action is against defendants severally liable, he may proceed against the defendants served, in the same manner as if they were the only defendants.
(3) If all the defendants have been served, judgment may be taken against any or either of them severally, when the plaintiff would be entitled to judgment against such defendant or defendants if the action has been against them or any of them alone.
(4) If the name of one or more partners has, for any cause, been omitted in an action in which judgment has been rendered against the defendants named in the summons, and the omission was not pleaded in action, the plaintiff, in case the judgment remains unsatisfied, may by action recover of such partner separately, upon proving his joint liability, notwithstanding he was not named in the original action; but the plaintiff may have satisfaction of only one judgment rendered for the same cause of action. (C.C.P., s. 87; Code, s. 222; Rev., s. 455; C.S., s. 497.)
Notes of Decisions
North State Fin. Co. v. Leonard, 139 S.E.2d 356 (N.C. 1964).
· cites it 11× “Leonard’s assignments of error are based on her exceptions (1) to the conclusion of law that she is bound by the judgment “by reason of the statutory provisions of G.S. 1-113,” and (2) to the judgment. The erroneous recital, referred to in our preliminary statement, indicates…”
Piedmont Rebar, Inc. v. Sun Constr., Inc., 564 S.E.2d 281 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 4× “Moreover, where an action is brought against two or more defendants who are jointly or severally liable, and the summons is served on one or more, but not all of them, the plaintiff may proceed against the defendants served, and if the plaintiff recovers judgment, such judgment…”
Post & Front Props., Ltd. v. Roanoke Constr. Co., 449 S.E.2d 765 (N.C. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 6× “G.S. § 1-113(4) (1983) (where partner not named as defendant in complaint and judgment remains unsatisfied, plaintiff may seek recovery against unnamed partner “upon proving his joint liability”).”
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-113(1): 2 cases
North State Fin. Co. v. Leonard, 139 S.E.2d 356 (N.C. 1964).
“Leonard’s assignments of error are based on her exceptions (1) to the conclusion of law that she is bound by the judgment “by reason of the statutory provisions of G.S. 1-113,” and (2) to the judgment. The erroneous recital, referred to in our preliminary statement, indicates…”
Post & Front Props., Ltd. v. Roanoke Constr. Co., 449 S.E.2d 765 (N.C. Ct. App. 1994).
“G.S. § 1-113(4) (1983) (where partner not named as defendant in complaint and judgment remains unsatisfied, plaintiff may seek recovery against unnamed partner “upon proving his joint liability”).”
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-113(4): 2 cases
Post & Front Props., Ltd. v. Roanoke Constr. Co., 449 S.E.2d 765 (N.C. Ct. App. 1994).
“G.S. § 1-113(4) (1983) (where partner not named as defendant in complaint and judgment remains unsatisfied, plaintiff may seek recovery against unnamed partner “upon proving his joint liability”).”
North State Fin. Co. v. Leonard, 139 S.E.2d 356 (N.C. 1964).
“Leonard’s assignments of error are based on her exceptions (1) to the conclusion of law that she is bound by the judgment “by reason of the statutory provisions of G.S. 1-113,” and (2) to the judgment. The erroneous recital, referred to in our preliminary statement, indicates…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.