Austin v. . Clarke
70 N.C. 458
Opinion
The C. C. P. invests the Court with ample powers, in all questions of practice and procedure, both as to amendments and continuances, to be exercised at the discretion of the J udge presiding, who is presumed’, best, to know what orders and what indulgence will promote the ends of justice, in each particular case- With the exercise of this discretion, we cannot interfere, and it is not the subject of appeal. C. C. P., sec. 133.
There is no error.
Pee Cueiam. Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Austin v. . Clarke, 70 N.C. 458 (N.C. 1874).
70 N.C. 458 (Austin v. . Clarke) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Lemons v. Old Hickory Council, Boy Scouts of America, Inc.
367 S.E.2d 655 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1988)
State v. . Sauls
130 S.E. 848 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1925)
Church v. . Church
74 S.E. 14 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1912)
United American Free-Will Baptist Church v. United American Free-Will Baptist Church
158 N.C. 564 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1912)
State v. Dewey.
51 S.E. 937 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1905)
Woodcock v. . Merrimon
30 S.E. 321 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1898)
Griffin v. Asheville Light Co.
16 S.E. 423 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1892)
Clemmons v. . Field
6 S.E. 790 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1888)
Jaffray v. . Bear
3 S.E. 914 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1887)
Gilchrist v. . Kitchen
86 N.C. 20 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1882)
Long v. . Logan
86 N.C. 535 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1882)
Henry v. . Cannon
86 N.C. 24 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1882)
McCurry v. . McCurry
82 N.C. 296 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1880)