Latham v. . Hodges

35 N.C. 267
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJune 5, 1852
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 35 N.C. 267 (Latham v. . Hodges) 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.

Bluebook
Latham v. . Hodges, 35 N.C. 267 (N.C. 1852).

Opinion

Ruffunt, C. J.

The parties cannot get at their object in the present mode of .proceeding. If they could have entitled themselves to the writ of error, for the alleged error of fact, in the Superior Court, it was only while the judgment against them w7as the power of that Court. Instead of pursuing that course, however, they appealed to this Court, upon the matter of law, so that the judgment, finally rendered against them, was the judgment of this Court, and not that of the Superior Court. Hence this writ cannot *269 be sustained; as error for matter of fact lies only in the Court, in which the record and judgment are, and not to reverse the judgment of another Court, and, especially, of a higher one.

Ter Curiam. Judgment reversed, and motion disallowed

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

Related

Dantzic v. State
182 S.E.2d 563 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1971)
Dantzic v. State
178 S.E.2d 790 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1971)
State v. Merritt
142 S.E.2d 687 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1965)
Boyd v. Smyth
205 N.W. 522 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1925)
Partlow v. State
141 N.E. 513 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
35 N.C. 267, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/latham-v-hodges-nc-1852.