Story v. . Truitt
This text of 138 S.E. 121 (Story v. . Truitt) 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.
Opinion
At April Term, 1923, a compulsory reference in the above entitled action was ordered by the court below, and L. J. Lawrence, Esquire, was appointed referee. The record, which imports verity, shows that no exception was taken by the plaintiff to the reference. *852 The right to a jury trial was waived. Driller Co. v. Worth, 117 N. C., p. 515; Baker v. Edwards, 176 N. C., 229; Jenkins v. Parker, 192 N. C., 188; Burroughs v. Umstead, ante, 842.
“It is the accepted position with us that the findings of fact by a referee, concurred in by the judge, are conclusive when there is competent evidence to sustain them.” Comrs. v. Abee Bros., 175 N. C., 701; Hardy v. Thornton, 192 N. C., p. 296; Cotton Mills v. Cotton Yarn Co., ibid., p. 713.
Upon a careful perusal of the record, there was competent evidence to sustain the findings of fact by the referee. The court below, in its judgment, set forth that exceptions of plaintiff were overruled, and “hereby confirms and adopts the findings of fact and conclusions of law. set forth in said report of the referee as fully and in the same manner as if herein recited.”
For the reasons given, the judgment of the court below is
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
138 S.E. 121, 193 N.C. 851, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 500, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/story-v-truitt-nc-1927.