Kramer v. Southern Railway Co.

38 S.E. 872, 128 N.C. 269, 1901 N.C. LEXIS 382
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided May 14, 1901·Published·Cited by 11 cases

Opinion

Pee Cueiam.

The appellant begins his brief as follows: “It is admitted that the charge of the Court was correct and proper under the decision of this Court in this same Case (Kramer v. R. Co., 121 N. C., 328), but it is respectfully submitted that there was error in that decision, and this case is brought back by appeal to this Court for the purpose of reviewing that decision.” This is the sole point presented.

No Court can admit such practice. There must be an end to litigation. The point decided on the former appeal is res *270 judicata in this case between these parties. It was the duty of the Judge below to follow our decision. It would have been judicial insubordination for him not to have done so. We can not adjudge that he was in error in obeying our mandate.

If there was error, the remedy was not in applying to the lower Court to disregard and overrule the decision of this Court, and appealing from his refusal to do so. The remedy was solely by application to this Court to correct its own errors, if any, by a rehearing. Wright v. R. Co., at this term; Shoaf v. Frost, 127 N. C., 306; Pretzfelder v. Ins. Co., 123 N. C., 164. In the present case there is, if possible, less defence for the appellant’s action, because, in fact, there was a rehearing on the former appeal, and the opinion (127 N. C., 328) was the deliberate conclusion of the Court after a second hearing. This appeal, if admissible,- would be in effect a second rehearing, and therefore a third hearing in this Court of the same point between the same parties.

The judgment below is

Affirmed.

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

Kramer v. Southern Railway Co., 38 S.E. 872, 128 N.C. 269, 1901 N.C. LEXIS 382 (N.C. 1901).

38 S.E. 872 (Kramer v. Southern Railway Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Carolina Power & Light Co. v. Bowman
51 S.E.2d 191 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1949)
Scott v. . Harrison
7 S.E.2d 547 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1940)
Tucker v. Leonard
1930 OK 209 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1930)
Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. v. City of Tulsa
1925 OK 238 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1925)
Holland v. Railroad
55 S.E. 835 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1906)
Jones v. Wilmington & Weldon Railroad
42 S.E. 559 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1902)
Perry v. Western North Carolina Railroad
40 S.E. 191 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1901)
Calhoun v. Palmer
8 Va. 88 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1851)