Allen v. . Hammond

30 S.E. 16, 122 N.C. 754, 1898 N.C. LEXIS 342
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided May 3, 1898·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Per Curia^n:

There is no complaint, answer or summons sent up, only the case on appeal; and the complaint is essential to be considered in passing on this controversy. Defects in the transcript are often remedied by certiorari when there is no laches on the part of the appellant, and sometime by the court’s sending down a certiorari ex mero motu to supply merely formal parts of the transcript. State v. Preston, 104 N. C., 733; State v. Beal, 119 N. C., 809; State v. Daniel, 121 N. C., 574. But here the defect is in a material respect and no motion for certiorari has been made by the appellant. He has not perfected his record on appeal and not having paid due attention to it, let the motion to dismiss be •entered.

Appeal dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Allen v. . Hammond, 30 S.E. 16, 122 N.C. 754, 1898 N.C. LEXIS 342 (N.C. 1898).

30 S.E. 16 (Allen v. . Hammond) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Thrush v. Thrush
94 S.E.2d 897 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1956)
Campbell v. . Campbell
39 S.E.2d 812 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1946)
McGowan v. Davenport
134 N.C. 526 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1904)
Finch v. Strickland.
40 S.E. 841 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1902)