Hilliard v. . Oram

11 S.E. 514, 106 N.C. 467
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided February 5, 1890·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Clark, J.:

The Court, on motion of defendants, set aside the verdict upon one^of the issues, on the ground that it was against the weight of the evidence, and directed a new trial on that issue. The Court refused plaintiff judgment for recovery of the land sued for, upon the issues found, and entered an interlocutory judgment. The appeal of the defendants is premature. They should have noted their exception, and after the trial is completed by a finding ujion the other issue and a final judgment, an appeal will lie. The Court here will not try causes by “piece-meal.” This has often been decided. University v. Bank, 92 N. C., 651; Hicks v. Gooch, 98 N. C., 112; Hailey v. Gray, 93 N. C., 195; Blackwell v. McCane and Wallace v. Douglas, at this term, and cases there cited.

Appeal dismissed.

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

Hilliard v. . Oram, 11 S.E. 514, 106 N.C. 467 (N.C. 1890).

11 S.E. 514 (Hilliard v. . Oram) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gardner v. Price Ex Rel. Price
80 S.E.2d 478 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1954)
Billings v. Charlotte Observer
64 S.E. 435 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1909)
Benton v. . Collins
28 S.E. 59 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1897)
Myers v. . Stafford
19 S.E. 232 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1894)
Emry v. Parker
111 N.C. 261 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1892)