Smith v. . Estes

3 N.C. 156
Superior Court of North Carolina·Decided July 5, 1801·Published

Opinion

Judge JJall

now renewed that order, though it was strenuously urged there had never been a decree to account. He did it he said, upon the ground of the former order ; but he considered the practice to be in some cases, ‘hat such a reference did not preclude the parties from insisting that he Ought not to be decreed to account. And owing to the particular circumstances of this ca£e, he would consider that the reference should not conclude, if the merits ware with the defendant; but he would not order that the said reference should not preclude Mallett fretft insisting that he should not be decreed to account-»

Sjntre-de hoc»

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

Smith v. . Estes, 3 N.C. 156 (N.C. Ct. App. 1801).

3 N.C. 156 (Smith v. . Estes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.