Neal v. . MacE
89 N.C. 171
Opinion
It does not appear in the record that any case has been settled upon appeal for this court, nor are errors assigned in the record. Upon examination, we find that the court has jurisdiction of the parties and the subject matter of the action. In such a case the judgment will be affirmed. Swepson v. Clayton, 74 N. C., 551; Bryant v. Fisher, 85 N. C., (369; McDaniel v. Pollock, 87 N. C., 503. Judgment affirmed. Let this be certified.
No error. Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Neal v. . MacE, 89 N.C. 171 (N.C. 1883).
89 N.C. 171 (Neal v. . MacE) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Abernathy v. . Withers
6 S.E. 376 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1888)
Randleman Manufacturing Co. v. Simmons
1 S.E. 923 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1887)
Rencher v. . Anderson
95 N.C. 208 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1886)
McCoy v. . Lassiter
94 N.C. 133 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1886)