Cauble v. . Boyden

69 N.C. 434

• Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
• Decided: June 5, 1873
• Status: Published

Opinion

Rodman, J.

The plaintiff brought an action before a Justice in the nature of a quantum mernit, for work and labor Rone. The defendant alleged that it was done under a written contract, wdrich had been paid in full, and offered the contract and receipt of the plaintiff in evidence. The •Justice excluded it. This exclusion must have been because the Justice found as a fact that the work claimed for, was Independent of the contract, and that the contract did not touch plaintiff’s claim. His judgment on this point (being on a matter of fact) was final, the sum found due being less than $25, and was not subject to review by the Superior Court or the Judge.

We do not understand the record to say that the Judge undertook to review it. He states, as we understand him, 4hat he found that the Justice had found the fact that the plaintiff’s claim was outside of the written contract, and that notwithstanding the contract, plaintiff was entitled to recover $23.75. He therefore affirmed the judgment of the Justice. There was no error in this.

Judgment affirmed, and judgment here accordingly.

Per Curiam. Judgment affirmed.