President & Directors of the State Bank v. Martin

13 N.C. 107

Opinion

Hall, Judge.

Upon the affidavits offered to the Court at April Term, A. D. 1828, the order for the removal of this suit to Gates Superior Court for trial, was rescinded; and the entry of the agreement that it should await the decision of the suit, The State Bank v. Wilson et al. removed from Pasquotank to Gates Superior Court, was made as of April Term, A. D. 1826, that being the term at which the agreement was entered into, as appears from affidavits then offered to the Court, and of which that Court was the only competent judge.

No objeevion appears to have been made to these entries at that time. At the Supreme Court in June, 1828, where the suit, The State Bank v. Wilson et al. had been ¿apried h> appeal from Gates Sup’ :or C<r judgment was give1) Tor the Dofoudams. Altee ward at October Term of Pasquotank Superior Court, a motion was made in this suit, to rescind the entry directing it to await the decision to be made in the suit. The State Bank v. Wilson et al. This was refused by the Court, and the same judgment was entered in if, which, had been given in the suit of The State Bank v. Wilson et al. In this I think the Judge acted correctly. It is to be observed, that the last mentioned motion was not made, until the judgment of this Court in the suit against Wilson was known, and then to have permitted the motion to prevail, would have been to permit the Plaintiff*to try his fortune the second time, contrary to his agreement. I say agreement, because the Superior Court, judging from the affidavits, considered that there was one.

Per Curiam. — Let the judgment below he affirmed.