Salmon Ex Rel. Rogers v. McLean

21 S.E. 178, 116 N.C. 209
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided February 5, 1895·Published

Opinion

Claeic, J.:

A new trial can not be granted by a justice of the peace {The Code, 865), but in the cases mentioned in The Code, 845, a rehearing may be allowed. Froneberger v. Lee, 66 N. C., 333; Gambill v. Gambill, 89 N. C., 201; Guano Company v. Bridgers, 93 N. C., 439. Though the judgment was first rendered 12 April, 1887, a rehearing was granted and the new judgment was rendered 2 May, 1887. The statute ran from the 2 May because the first judgment was vacated by the rehearing. This action was begun April 30, 1894, which was within the seven years limited by statute. Oode, Sec. 153 (1). The defendant has *211 no ground to complain, for the rehearing was granted on his motion. In instructing the jury that the judgment was barred, there was error.

Error.

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

Salmon Ex Rel. Rogers v. McLean, 21 S.E. 178, 116 N.C. 209 (N.C. 1895).

21 S.E. 178 (Salmon Ex Rel. Rogers v. McLean) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gambill v. . Gambill
89 N.C. 201 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1883)
Wm. Froneburger v. . H. D. Lee .
66 N.C. 333 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1872)
Navassa Guano Co. v. Bridgers
93 N.C. 439 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1885)