Broadfoot v. . McKeithan

92 N.C. 561
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedFebruary 5, 1885
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 92 N.C. 561 (Broadfoot v. . McKeithan) 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
Broadfoot v. . McKeithan, 92 N.C. 561 (N.C. 1885).

Opinion

MeeriMON, J.

The plaintiff moved at the present term, to re-instate upon the docket a supposed appeal, dismissed at the. last October Term of this Court.

We do not deem it necessary or proper to find the facts involved in the motion and decide upon its merits, because what seems to have been intended to be the transcript of an appeal, is not such transcript in any legal sense. It does not appear from it that a Superior Court was held at any time or place, or that a Judge held a term of the court, or gave a judgment from which an appeal was or could be taken. The supposed transcript is so essentially defective, that it cannot give us jurisdiction to act upon it for any purpose. The motion must therefore be dismissed as having been improvidently made.

It is so ordered.

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

Related

State v. . Frizell
16 S.E. 409 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1892)
State v. . Preston
10 S.E. 84 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1889)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
92 N.C. 561, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/broadfoot-v-mckeithan-nc-1885.