1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. S.E.2d
  4. 444 S.E.2d
  5. 444 S.E.2d 630 (1994)
 

CROSSMAN v. MOORE

No. 9326SC907.

444 S.E.2d 630 (1994)

115 N.C. App. 372

Dana M. CROSSMAN, Appellant/Plaintiff, v. Van Dolan MOORE; and Van Dolan Moore, II, Individually, Appellees/Defendants.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

June 21, 1994.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Wishart, Norris, Henninger & Pittman, P.A. by William H. Elam and Daniel C. Marks, Charlotte, for plaintiff-appellant.

Kennedy Covington Lobdell & Hickman by F. Fincher Jarrell, Charlotte, for defendants-appellees.

ARNOLD, Chief Judge.

Plaintiff contends the trial court erred in refusing to allow relation back of the amended complaint. Rule 15(c), which provides when an amended pleading will relate back, reads as follows:

(c) Relation back of amendments.—A claim asserted in an amended pleading is deemed to have been interposed at the time the claim in the original pleading was interposed, unless the original pleading does not give notice of the transactions...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases