# Taylor v. Taylor

> Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 9, 1962 · 257 N.C. 130

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9565038

## Case

- **Full name:** Carlston F. Taylor v. June W. Taylor
- **Court:** Supreme Court of North Carolina
- **Decided:** May 9, 1962
- **Citations:** 257 N.C. 130; 125 S.E.2d 373; 1962 N.C. LEXIS 562
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Higgins
- **Judges:** Bobbitt, Higgins
- **Cited by:** 25 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9565038

## Opinion text

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.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9565038. Public record. Not legal advice.