Futrell v. . Deanes
20 S.E. 1013, 116 N.C. 38
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Futrell v. . Deanes. Read the opinion of the Court — 116 N.C. 38 →
Opinion
It appears from the record that the only question was, which party should pay the costs. Such questions are not considered in this Court. S.v. R. R.,
Appeal dismissed.
Cited: Elliott v. Tyson, post, 184; Monroe v. Angel, post, 847; Elliottv. Tyson,
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Futrell v. . Deanes, 20 S.E. 1013, 116 N.C. 38 (N.C. 1895).
20 S.E. 1013 (Futrell v. . Deanes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State v. . R. R.
74 N.C. 287 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1876)
Elliott v. . Tyson
23 S.E. 102 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1895)
Hasty v. . Funderburk
89 N.C. 93 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1883)
VanDyke v. Ætna Life Insurance
93 S.E. 444 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1917)