Case Name: ROBERT L. STEELE III v. A. B. COLE
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1937-05-19
Citations: 211 N.C. 743
Docket Number: 
Parties: ROBERT L. STEELE III v. A. B. COLE.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 211
Pages: 743–744

Head Matter:
ROBERT L. STEELE III v. A. B. COLE.
(Filed 19 May, 1937.)
Appeal by plaintiff and defendant from Rousseau, J., at October Term, 1936, of Richmond.
Action to recover of defendant individually the purchase price of an interest in certain land in the State of Florida, conveyed by plaintiff to Fannie L. Steele, incompetent, at the request of defendant. The defendant answered, alleging, among other things, that he and George P. Entwistle were trustees of the estate of Fannie L. Steele, and that he was not personally liable; that plaintiff had been paid in full for his interest in the land; that his title to a portion of the interest conveyed was defective, and defendant set forth at length numerous transactions between tbe parties and those from whom plaintiff’s interest was derived, and asked that A. B. Cole and George P. Entwistle, as trustees of Fannie L. Steele, be made parties, and also that Mrs. M. E. Steele, both individually and as executrix of the estate of Bobert L. Steele II, be made a party.
The plaintiff demurred to the answer and asked for judgment on the pleadings. Plaintiff thereafter filed a reply.
The court overruled the demurrer, denied the motion for judgment in the pleadings, ordered that A. B. Cole and George P. Entwistle, as trustees of Fannie L. Steele, be made parties defendant, and denied defendant’s motion to make Mrs. M. E. Steele, individually and as executrix of Bobt. L. Steele II, a party.
Both plaintiff and defendant appealed.
A. M. Stack and Fred W. Bynum for plaintiff.
J. G. Sedberry for defendant.

Opinion:
Per Cueiam.
The plaintiff's demurrer to the answer and his motion for judgment on the pleadings, on the ground that the answer did not set up any defense to plaintiff's action, were properly overruled.
Likewise, we see no error in the denial of defendant's motion that Mrs. M. E. Steele be made a party defendant.
On both appeals
Judgment affirmed.