Cahoon v. Board of Commissioners of Hyde County

207 N.C. 48
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided September 19, 1934·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Bbogdem, J.

“It is well settled that in an action of this kind this Court can review the evidence and determine questions of fact as well as of law, but there is a presumption that the proceedings in the court below are correct, and the appellant must show error.” Parker v. Debnam, 195 N. C., 56, 141 S. E., 535; Castle v. Threadgill, 203 N. C., 441, 166 S. E., 313; Shelly v. Grainger, 204 N. C., 488, 168 S. E., 736.

There was evidence to- support the findings of fact made by the trial judge. Moreover, it has been made to appear to the court that $10,000 of the sum involved in the proceeding has already been borrowed and used by the county for the purpose indicated. Consequently, the question presented is academic. Moore v. Monument Co., 166 N. C., 211, 81 S. E., 170; Rousseau v. Bullis, 201 N. C., 12.

Affirmed.

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

Cahoon v. Board of Commissioners of Hyde County, 207 N.C. 48 (N.C. 1934).

207 N.C. 48 (Cahoon v. Board of Commissioners of Hyde County) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cauble v. Bell
107 S.E.2d 557 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1959)