Meadows Fertilizer Co. v. Farmers Trading Co.

Stacy, C. J. We are not now concerned with whether the defendants will be ¡oermitted to show upon the hearing the alleged contemporaneous oral agreement as to the price to be paid for the fertilizer. Walker v. Venters, 148 N. C., 388, 62 S. E., 510. The appeal presents the correctness of the order directing that plaintiff recover of the defendants the amount admitted to be due without prejudice to the plaintiff’s right to litigate the balance of the note. The statute under which the order was made, C. S., 865, provides that when the answer “expressly, or by not denying, admits part of the plaintiff’s claim to be just, the judge, on motion, may order the defendant to satisfy that part of the claim, and may enforce the order as it enforces a judgment or provisional remedy.” In Parker v. Bledsoe, 87 N. C., 221, on facts closely akin to those here appearing, an order was entered which directed that the plaintiff recover of the defendants the amount admitted to be due and retained the action for further hearing on the balance of plaintiff’s claim. This was the procedure followed in the instant case. The order is authorized by the statute. 34 C. J., 143. Affirmed.