Kerr v. . Hicks

29 S.E. 370, 122 N.C. 409, 1898 N.C. LEXIS 274
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided March 22, 1898·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

This case was referred, and on coming in of the report certain issues were eliminated and submitted to the jury. After the verdict thereon the cause was recommitted to the referee with instructions to revise and conform his report in accordance with the verdict, and also to correct his calculations of interest to the basis of 6 per cent. The defendant appealed. The appeal is premature. The defendant should have caused his exception to be entered, and can appeal from the final judgment. Wallace v. Douglas, 105 N. C., 42, in which it is said, quoting Grant v. Reese, 90 N. C., 3, “Slight attention to the decisions of the Court would prevent miscarriages like the present and facilitate the administration of justice.”

Appeal dismissed.

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

Kerr v. . Hicks, 29 S.E. 370, 122 N.C. 409, 1898 N.C. LEXIS 274 (N.C. 1898).

29 S.E. 370 (Kerr v. . Hicks) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kerr v. . Hicks
70 S.E. 621 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1911)