Dupree v. . Tuten

1 S.E. 775, 97 N.C. 94
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedFebruary 5, 1887
StatusPublished

This text of 1 S.E. 775 (Dupree v. . Tuten) 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
Dupree v. . Tuten, 1 S.E. 775, 97 N.C. 94 (N.C. 1887).

Opinion

*95 Merrimon, J.

It does not appear from the record that any exception was taken to the rulings of the Court, nor are errors assigned either in terms or by reasonable implication.

There is nothing in the record that shows the slightest dissatisfaction on the part of the appellants, except simply the fact that they took the appeal.

It is the well settled rule applicable in such cases, that the judgment must be affirmed. Meekins v. Tatem, 79 N. C., 546; Paschal v. Bullock, 80 N. C., 8; Bank v. Creditors, Ibid., 9; Mott v. Ramsay, 90 N. C., 29; Pleasants v. The Railroad Co., 95 N.C., 195.

The judgment must therefore be affirmed.

No error. Affirmed.

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

Related

Paschall v. . Bullock
80 N.C. 8 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1879)
Pleasants v. Raleigh & Augusta Air-Line Railroad
95 N.C. 195 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1886)
Meekins v. . Tatem
79 N.C. 546 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1878)
Mott v. Ramsay
90 N.C. 29 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1884)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 S.E. 775, 97 N.C. 94, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dupree-v-tuten-nc-1887.