Bowie v. . Tucker

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Bowie v. . Tucker

168 S.E. 841, 204 N.C. 505, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 178

DecidedApril 12, 1933

StatusPublished

This text of 168 S.E. 841 (Bowie v. . Tucker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bowie v. . Tucker, 168 S.E. 841, 204 N.C. 505, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 178 (N.C. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

ConNoe, J.

This action was referred by the court with the consent of the partiés to arbitrators to determine the issues arising on the pleadings and the rights and liabilities of the parties involved in the controversy out of which the action arose. It was ordered that the report and award of the arbitrators should be a final determination of all *506 matters at issue between the plaintiffs and the defendants involved in the controversy. The report and the award filed with the court by the arbitrators does not show on its face that the arbitrators exceeded the terms of the consent order of the court by which they were named.

It was error for the court on its own motion, without objection or exception to the report and award filed by the arbitrators, to remand the same to the arbitrators, with directions that they. find • other and additional facts. In the absence of objection or exception filed by a party to the action, judgment should have been entered by the court on the award. Robertson v. Marshall, 155 N. C., 167, 71 S. E., 67; Snell v. Chatham, 150 N. C., 729, 64 S. E., 870; Herndon v. Ins. Co., 110 N. C., 279, 14 S. E., 742.

Error.

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

ConNoe, J.

This action was referred by the court with the consent of the partiés to arbitrators to determine the issues arising on the pleadings and the rights and liabilities of the parties involved in the controversy out of which the action arose. It was ordered that the report and award of the arbitrators should be a final determination of all *506 matters at issue between the plaintiffs and the defendants involved in the controversy. The report and the award filed with the court by the arbitrators does not show on its face that the arbitrators exceeded the terms of the consent order of the court by which they were named.

It was error for the court on its own motion, without objection or exception to the report and award filed by the arbitrators, to remand the same to the arbitrators, with directions that they. find • other and additional facts. In the absence of objection or exception filed by a party to the action, judgment should have been entered by the court on the award. Robertson v. Marshall, 155 N. C., 167, 71 S. E., 67; Snell v. Chatham, 150 N. C., 729, 64 S. E., 870; Herndon v. Ins. Co., 110 N. C., 279, 14 S. E., 742.

Error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 S.E. 841, 204 N.C. 505, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 178, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bowie-v-tucker-nc-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack