Sherrill v. Western Union Telegraph Co.

21 S.E. 400, 116 N.C. 654
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedFebruary 5, 1895
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 21 S.E. 400 (Sherrill v. Western Union Telegraph 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
Sherrill v. Western Union Telegraph Co., 21 S.E. 400, 116 N.C. 654 (N.C. 1895).

Opinion

Clarii, J.:

The case on appeal was settled by the Judge. The defendant files an affidavit for certiorari on the ground that the word “not” was b3r inadvertence left out in an important part of the testimony and appends a telegram from the Judge, to that effect, expressing his readiness to make the correction. This complies with the requirements laid down in the authorities. Boyer v. Teague, 106 N. C., 571; Bank v. Bridgers, 114 N. C., 107. That the hearing might not be delayed, an instanter certiorari *655 was ordered to issue and tbe cause placed at tbe end of tbe District to be called in its order on tbe second call of the docket for the week. Considering tbe nature of the correction asked, on suggestion from tbe Court, the argument is proceeded with on tbe first call, subject to any change which may be made in the record by the return to the certiorari, the decision being withheld till such return is made. Motion Allowed.

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

Related

Wolfe v. North Carolina
364 U.S. 177 (Supreme Court, 1960)
Barber v. Justice.
50 S.E. 445 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1905)
Hansley v. Jamesville & Washington Railroad
117 N.C. 565 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1895)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
21 S.E. 400, 116 N.C. 654, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sherrill-v-western-union-telegraph-co-nc-1895.