Franklin v. Gentry

222 N.C. 41
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided September 23, 1942·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

A careful perusal of tbe record leaves us witb tbe impression tbat no reversible error bas been shown, and tbat tbe verdict and judgment should be upheld. However, it appears tbat tbe affidavit, upon- which tbe order of appeal in forma pauperis was allowed, was not made during tbe term or within five days thereafter as required by C. S., 649. See Powell v. Moore, 204 N. C., 654, 169 S. E., 281; McIntire v. McIntire, 203 N. C., 631, 166 S. E., 732. This defeats our jurisdiction. Berwer v. Ins. Co., 210 N. C., 814, 188 S. E., 618; S. v. Mitchell, 221 N. C., 460. “Giving bond on appeal, or granting leave to appeal without bond, are jurisdictional, and, unless tbe statute is complied witb, tbe appeal is not in this Court, and we can take no cognizance of tbe case, except to dismiss it from our docket.” Honeycutt v. Watkins, 151 N. C., 652, 65 S. E., 762.

Appeal dismissed.

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

Franklin v. Gentry, 222 N.C. 41 (N.C. 1942).

222 N.C. 41 (Franklin v. Gentry) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In Re Burrus
169 S.E.2d 879 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1969)
Anderson v. Worthington
78 S.E.2d 333 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1953)
Clark v. . Clark
36 S.E.2d 261 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1945)