Galloway v. . McKeithen

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Galloway v. . McKeithen

27 N.C. 12

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedDecember 5, 1844

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 27 N.C. 12 (Galloway v. . McKeithen) 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

Galloway v. . McKeithen, 27 N.C. 12 (N.C. 1844).

Pincite

Opinion

DaNiel, J.

We think that the Judge erred in non-suiting the plaintiffs. The County Court of Brunswick, at the December Session, 1842, had a right to amend any omission in the record of the same court, which had taken place at June Term 1837, by the act of the court or the clerk. And, when the record was thus amended, it stood as if it liad never been defective, or as if all the entries had been made and completed at the June Session of 1837; for the affidavits, motions and orders, which were made at the December Session 1842, were not, and ought not to have been, incorporated in the amended record of the session of June, 1837 — they were no part of it. Bright v. Sugg, 4 Dev. 492. State v. Roberts, 2 Dev. &. Bat. 540. It appears by the transcript, that the County Court, at their June Session in 1837, did take an administration bond of the plaintiffs in the penalty of $8000, with sureties approved by the said Court. We think, that the record of the *14 June Session, 1837, of the County Court, did shew that the plaintiffs were appointed, gave bond and qualified as administrators of J. Corbit at that term.

The records of a Court, upon matters within its jurisdiction, when offered in evidence, cannot be impugned by counter evidence. Reid v Kelly, 1 Dev. 313.

The non-suit must be set aside and a new trial awarded.

Per Curiam, Judgment accordingly.

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

DaNiel, J.

We think that the Judge erred in non-suiting the plaintiffs. The County Court of Brunswick, at the December Session, 1842, had a right to amend any omission in the record of the same court, which had taken place at June Term 1837, by the act of the court or the clerk. And, when the record was thus amended, it stood as if it liad never been defective, or as if all the entries had been made and completed at the June Session of 1837; for the affidavits, motions and orders, which were made at the December Session 1842, were not, and ought not to have been, incorporated in the amended record of the session of June, 1837 — they were no part of it. Bright v. Sugg, 4 Dev. 492. State v. Roberts, 2 Dev. &. Bat. 540. It appears by the transcript, that the County Court, at their June Session in 1837, did take an administration bond of the plaintiffs in the penalty of $8000, with sureties approved by the said Court. We think, that the record of the *14 June Session, 1837, of the County Court, did shew that the plaintiffs were appointed, gave bond and qualified as administrators of J. Corbit at that term.

The records of a Court, upon matters within its jurisdiction, when offered in evidence, cannot be impugned by counter evidence. Reid v Kelly, 1 Dev. 313.

The non-suit must be set aside and a new trial awarded.

Per Curiam, Judgment accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 N.C. 12, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/galloway-v-mckeithen-nc-1844.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack