Peale v. . Folsome

Superior Court of North Carolina

Peale v. . Folsome

2 N.C. 181

DecidedApril 5, 1795

StatusPublished

This text of 2 N.C. 181 (Peale v. . Folsome) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior 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

Peale v. . Folsome, 2 N.C. 181 (N.C. Ct. App. 1795).

Pincite

Opinion

Were it a plea puis darrein continuance, the plea of non est factum would be thereby waived, and you would have no need to prove the execution of the bond; but unless the other side will concede it to be a plea puisdarrein continuance, the Court cannot take it to be so. It does not purport in itself, nor by the entry of it on the record, to be a plea of some new matter arisen since the last continuance. It might have been, and probably was, a plea added to the others by motion to the court, or by consent of the opposite party, as an original plea. A juror was withdrawn by consent.

See Greer v. Sheppard, ante, 96. *Page 131

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

Were it a plea puis darrein continuance, the plea of non est factum would be thereby waived, and you would have no need to prove the execution of the bond; but unless the other side will concede it to be a plea puisdarrein continuance, the Court cannot take it to be so. It does not purport in itself, nor by the entry of it on the record, to be a plea of some new matter arisen since the last continuance. It might have been, and probably was, a plea added to the others by motion to the court, or by consent of the opposite party, as an original plea. A juror was withdrawn by consent.

See Greer v. Sheppard, ante, 96. *Page 131

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 N.C. 181, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peale-v-folsome-ncsuperct-1795.