Den Ex Dem. of Oneal v. Butler

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Den Ex Dem. of Oneal v. Butler

14 N.C. 94

DecidedJune 5, 1831

StatusPublished

This text of 14 N.C. 94 (Den Ex Dem. of Oneal v. Butler) 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

Den Ex Dem. of Oneal v. Butler, 14 N.C. 94 (N.C. 1831).

Pincite

Opinion

Henderson, Chief-Justice.

The first exception goes m a mere matter of form. We think it should be dis *95 allowed, for we cannot but know, that the lessor of John Ben is the party complaining, and that John Ben is a fictitious person, used for the purpose of bringing the merits before the court; we must also know that the tenant in possession is the substantial defendant, and that Bichará, Fen is likewise a fictitious person, introduced as tbe defendant, for the same reasons that John Ben is made plaintiff. We think the award is made in the suit submitted. This disposes of the first and second exceptions ; for they arc substantially the same, presented in different forms.

We cannot perceive any uncertainty in the award, to sustain the third exception.

The judgment must tie reversed, and judgment according to the award entered for the defendants. We should also confirm the award in the suit in equity between The same parties ; hut the papers are not sent up, or not a. sufficiency of them to enable us to form a decree.

Per Curiam. — Judgment according to award.

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

Henderson, Chief-Justice.

The first exception goes m a mere matter of form. We think it should be dis *95 allowed, for we cannot but know, that the lessor of John Ben is the party complaining, and that John Ben is a fictitious person, used for the purpose of bringing the merits before the court; we must also know that the tenant in possession is the substantial defendant, and that Bichará, Fen is likewise a fictitious person, introduced as tbe defendant, for the same reasons that John Ben is made plaintiff. We think the award is made in the suit submitted. This disposes of the first and second exceptions ; for they arc substantially the same, presented in different forms.

We cannot perceive any uncertainty in the award, to sustain the third exception.

The judgment must tie reversed, and judgment according to the award entered for the defendants. We should also confirm the award in the suit in equity between The same parties ; hut the papers are not sent up, or not a. sufficiency of them to enable us to form a decree.

Per Curiam. — Judgment according to award.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

14 N.C. 94, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/den-ex-dem-of-oneal-v-butler-nc-1831.