Den ex dem. Smith v. Greenlee

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Den ex dem. Smith v. Greenlee

14 N.C. 387

DecidedDecember 15, 1832

StatusPublished

This text of 14 N.C. 387 (Den ex dem. Smith v. Greenlee) 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. Smith v. Greenlee, 14 N.C. 387 (N.C. 1832).

Pincite

Opinion

D anted, Judge,

after stating the entries above set forth, proceeded as follows:

As to the first point, it appears that James M. Greenlee was the defendant at the time he made the affidavit and when the order of removal was entered.

Upon the second point, we are of opinion, that the affidavit contained matter sufficient to justify the remo[389]*389val of tlie cause. The record of the cause was not to be sent from Buncombe to Rutherford until the ensuing term of the Superior Court of the latter county ; the Superior Court of Buncombe could, while the cause remained there, make any orders in it by consent; this appears to have been the case with the order now complained of. Were it erroneous, the consent of the parties prevents them from objecting to it now¿ Upon looking through’ the record, we think the judgment should be affirmed.

Per Curiam. — Judgmektt aeeirmed.

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

D anted, Judge,

after stating the entries above set forth, proceeded as follows:

As to the first point, it appears that James M. Greenlee was the defendant at the time he made the affidavit and when the order of removal was entered.

Upon the second point, we are of opinion, that the affidavit contained matter sufficient to justify the remo[389]*389val of tlie cause. The record of the cause was not to be sent from Buncombe to Rutherford until the ensuing term of the Superior Court of the latter county ; the Superior Court of Buncombe could, while the cause remained there, make any orders in it by consent; this appears to have been the case with the order now complained of. Were it erroneous, the consent of the parties prevents them from objecting to it now¿ Upon looking through’ the record, we think the judgment should be affirmed.

Per Curiam. — Judgmektt aeeirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

14 N.C. 387, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/den-ex-dem-smith-v-greenlee-nc-1832.