Rodman v. . Austin

7 N.C. 252
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMay 5, 1819
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 7 N.C. 252 (Rodman v. . Austin) 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
Rodman v. . Austin, 7 N.C. 252 (N.C. 1819).

Opinion

HewdersoN, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the Court:

This is a motion for a Certiorari, grounded on the papers returned to the present term between the s ame parties. Those papers are the Plaintiff’s affidavit, the record of a suit in Halifax Superior Court, between Austin Plaintiff, and Rodman Defendant, with a statement of the presiding Judge. From a view of these papers, we are of opinion, *254 that a Certiorari should not issue j for it would be entirely useless. The record does not exhibit those grounds of complaint stated in the affidavit, and we must, upon a view pronounce the same judgment that ivas pronounced in the Court below, whatever might be our opinion if the Judge’s statement formed a part of the case. — But so far from its being entered on the record, it is not even referred to ; and we cannot perceive how we can incorporate it with, or make it a part of the case. It might possibly be made at the time the cause was tried, or it might have been made a month afterwards. It would, therefore, be vain and useless to issue the writ. — The motion must be disallowed.

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

Related

Carroll v. Victor Manufacturing Co.
104 S.E. 895 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1920)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
7 N.C. 252, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rodman-v-austin-nc-1819.