Richardson v. Southern Express Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Richardson v. Southern Express Co.

65 S.E. 616, 151 N.C. 60, 1909 N.C. LEXIS 193

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedSeptember 29, 1909

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 65 S.E. 616 (Richardson v. Southern Express Co.) 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

Richardson v. Southern Express Co., 65 S.E. 616, 151 N.C. 60, 1909 N.C. LEXIS 193 (N.C. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

MANNING, J.,

after stating the ease: Under the decision of this Court in Moore v. Lumber Co., 150 N. C., 261, this appeal must be dismissed, for an appeal will not lie from an interlocutory or a partial judgment of this character. The damages should have been assessed either by the jury or by the referee appointed by the court. If by the referee, he should have reported to the court, when a final' judgment-should have been rendered, and from which the defendant, having'entered and reserved his exceptions taken during the trial, could have prosecuted its appeal. This Court has uniformly enforced this rule of practice. Rogerson v. Lumber Co., 136 N. C., 266. While the counsel of both parties expressed their desire that this Court should pass upon the other questions presented by this appeal, we prefer to adhere to the rule enunciated in Hinton v. Ins. Co., 116 N. C., 22, and Milling Co. v. Finlay, 110 N. C., 411, to pass only upon the questions decisive of the appeal. In this case especially do we perceive no urgent reason for departing from this rule, as none of the evidence and no part of the judge’s charge is sent up, and we cannot see how fully the facts upon which the other question presented to us depends were developed. Upon the authority cited, the appeal is dismissed as premature.

Appeal dismissed.

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

MANNING, J.,

after stating the ease: Under the decision of this Court in Moore v. Lumber Co., 150 N. C., 261, this appeal must be dismissed, for an appeal will not lie from an interlocutory or a partial judgment of this character. The damages should have been assessed either by the jury or by the referee appointed by the court. If by the referee, he should have reported to the court, when a final' judgment-should have been rendered, and from which the defendant, having'entered and reserved his exceptions taken during the trial, could have prosecuted its appeal. This Court has uniformly enforced this rule of practice. Rogerson v. Lumber Co., 136 N. C., 266. While the counsel of both parties expressed their desire that this Court should pass upon the other questions presented by this appeal, we prefer to adhere to the rule enunciated in Hinton v. Ins. Co., 116 N. C., 22, and Milling Co. v. Finlay, 110 N. C., 411, to pass only upon the questions decisive of the appeal. In this case especially do we perceive no urgent reason for departing from this rule, as none of the evidence and no part of the judge’s charge is sent up, and we cannot see how fully the facts upon which the other question presented to us depends were developed. Upon the authority cited, the appeal is dismissed as premature.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

65 S.E. 616, 151 N.C. 60, 1909 N.C. LEXIS 193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richardson-v-southern-express-co-nc-1909.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack