Heath v. . Lancaster
This text of 20 S.E. 962 (Heath v. . Lancaster) 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.
Opinion
The record proper was filed in this Court at the first Term after the trial below and a certiorari asked for, as the case had not been settled by the Judge. This was the proper course, and if the appellant was not in laches, the certiorari would issue. Owens v. Phelps, 91 N. C., 253; Pittman v. Kimberly, 92 N. C., 562. In such case, as the trial Judge ( His Honor Judge Graves) has since died, a new trial would be ordered. State v. Parks, 107 N. C., 821; Brendle v. Reeves, 115 N. C., 552. But in the present case, the appellant does not negative laches. It appears that after the disagreement about settling the case, the appellant did not immediately request the Judge to settle the case as required by section 550 of The Code, but delayed for several weeks to do so. This forfeits his claim to a certiorari for the reasons given in Simmons v. Andrews, 106 N. C., 201. An inspection of the record shows no errors of which the appellant can complain, and the judgment must be affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
20 S.E. 962, 116 N.C. 69, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/heath-v-lancaster-nc-1895.