Jones v. . Jones

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Jones v. . Jones

34 N.C. 98

Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided June 5, 1851·Published

Opinion

For the reasons set forth in the case of Bagley v. Wood, ante, 90, without examining into the testimony upon which the Superior Court acted, which we have no power to do, the orders of said court are affirmed upon the ground that we have no power to revise a discretionary judgment of the Superior Court except for error in law. Here none is shown.

PER CURIAM. Affirmed.

(NOTE. — The same point decided at this term in the case ofLeavitt v. Etheridge, from Currituck.)

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

For the reasons set forth in the case of Bagley v. Wood, ante, 90, without examining into the testimony upon which the Superior Court acted, which we have no power to do, the orders of said court are affirmed upon the ground that we have no power to revise a discretionary judgment of the Superior Court except for error in law. Here none is shown.

PER CURIAM. Affirmed.

(NOTE. — The same point decided at this term in the case ofLeavitt v. Etheridge, from Currituck.)

Jones v. . Jones, 34 N.C. 98 (N.C. 1851).

Pincite

34 N.C. 98 (Jones v. . Jones) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.