Every action must be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest, except as otherwise provided; but this section does not authorize the assignment of a thing in action not arising out of contract. An action may be maintained by a grantee of real estate in his own name, when he or any grantor or other person through whom he derives title might maintain such action, notwithstanding the conveyance of the grantor is void, by reason of the actual possession of a person claiming under a title adverse to that of the grantor, or other person, at the time of the delivery of the conveyance. In case of an assignment of a thing in action the action by the assignee is without prejudice to any setoff or other defense, existing at the time of, or before notice of, the assignment; but this does not apply to a negotiable promissory note or bill of exchange, transferred in good faith, upon good consideration, and before maturity. (C.C.P., s. 55; 1874-5, c. 256; Code, s. 177; Rev., s. 400; C.S., s. 446.)
Notes of Decisions
J & B Slurry Seal Co. v. Mid-South Aviation, Inc., 362 S.E.2d 812 (N.C. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 20× “Defendants contend the subrogation receipt evidences an absolute assignment to Insurer of all plaintiff's claims such that Insurer is the only real party in interest to this *818 action under Rule 17(a) and Section 1-57. Plaintiff contends the document is ambiguous but, at most,…”
Booker v. Everhart, 240 S.E.2d 360 (N.C. 1978).
· cites it 3× “G.S. 1-57 says, in part: “Every action must be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest .”
Sandhill Amusements, Inc. v. Sheriff of Onslow Cnty., 762 S.E.2d 666 (N.C. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 4× “12(b)(6), and failure to bring suit on behalf of the real party in interest under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-57 (2013). On 11 October 2013, the trial court held a hearing concerning Sheriff Brown’s motion to dismiss and Plaintiffs’ motion for injunctive relief.”
Martin v. Ray Lackey Enter., Inc., 396 S.E.2d 327 (N.C. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 3× “A The defendants first contend that the plaintiff could not properly prosecute this claim in that Clyde, and not the plaintiff, is the real party in interest.”
Street v. Smart Corp., 578 S.E.2d 695 (N.C. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 2× “§ 1A-1, Rule 17(a) (2001); G.S. § 1-57 (2001). “ ‘ “A real party in interest is a party who is benefited or injured by the judgment in the case.”
Sterling v. Gil Soucy Trucking, Ltd., 552 S.E.2d 674 (N.C. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 4× “Soucy Trucking and Caron have not paid their share, they have suffered no harm and cannot yet pursue a contribution claim. Thus, the trial court's approval of the post-judgment settlements did not affect defendants, and they cannot attack their joint tort-feasors' attempts to…”
Branch Banking & Trust Co. v. Bank of Washington, 120 S.E.2d 830 (N.C. 1961).
· cites it 9× “291 ; Daniel on Negotiable Instruments, Seventh Edition, Vol. II, § 1262. Plaintiff concedes it received the drafts originally as agent for collection and was not, originally, the real party in interest under G.”
Land v. Tall House Bldg. Co., 563 S.E.2d 8 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 6× “This is due to the arrangement set forth in the settlement agreement between the Lands, Tall House, and ACA.”
Horton v. New South Ins. Co., 468 S.E.2d 856 (N.C. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 2× “See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-57 (1983). However, assignments of personal tort claims are void as against public policy because they promote champerty.”
In Re the Est. of Anderson, 559 S.E.2d 222 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 6× “*224 § 31A-1 McRae would be barred from recovering from Fairley's estate as a surviving spouse and therefore lacked standing as a real party in interest to petition the superior court to remove Anderson as the administrator of Fairley's estate.”
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.