Opinion

Taylor v. Taylor

  • 257 N.C. 130
  • 125 S.E.2d 373
  • 1962 N.C. LEXIS 562
Court
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Filed
May 9, 1962
Status
Published
Author
Higgins
On the bench
Bobbitt, Higgins
Cited by
25 cases
Authority
More cited than 5.8%

The opinion

Higgins, J.,

dissenting. The plaintiff here was the defendant in the case of State v. Taylor in the Municipal Court of Winston-Salem. He entered a plea of not guilty to the charge of abandoning his wife, the present defendant. The judge of the municipal court entered a verdict of guilty. From the judgment imposed, the defendant (plaintiff here) did not appeal.

This Court is now holding the judgment of the municipal court is res judicata as to abandonment and a bar to plaintiff’s right to proceed in this divorce action. The first requisite to a valid plea of res judicata is identity of parties. Reid v. Holden, 242 N.C. 408 , 88 S.E. 2d 125 ; Coach Co. v. Burrell, 241 N.C. 432 , 85 S.E. 2d 688 ; Leary v. Bank, 215 N.C. 501 , 2 S.E. 2d 570 . In the criminal case the State of North Carolina was the plaintiff. Mrs. Taylor may have been a witness, but she was not a party. Res judicata binds parties — not witnesses.

I think the plea in bar should have been overruled. The defendant, of course, would be entitled to her opportunity before the jury. The plaintiff’s admission was not of guilt, but that he was convicted by the court. I vote to reverse.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.