Thompson v. . Hood, Commissioner of Banks

166 S.E. 927, 203 N.C. 851, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 114
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided November 2, 1932·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

There was sufficient evidence at tbe trial of tbis action to support tbe findings of fact made by tbe referee, and approved by tbe judge. These findings of fact are, therefore, conclusive.

“It is settled by all tbe decisions on tbe subject, with none to tbe contrary, that tbe findings of fact, made by a referee, and approved by tbe trial judge, are not subject to review on appeal, if they are supported by any competent evidence.” Kenney v. Hotel Co., 194 N. C., 44, 138 S. E., 349.

Tbe judgment upon tbe facts set out in tbe report of tbe referee, is

Affirmed.

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

Thompson v. . Hood, Commissioner of Banks, 166 S.E. 927, 203 N.C. 851, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 114 (N.C. 1932).

166 S.E. 927 (Thompson v. . Hood, Commissioner of Banks) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hall v. City of Fayetteville
103 S.E.2d 815 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1958)