Vest v. . Cooper

68 N.C. 131
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJanuary 5, 1873
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 68 N.C. 131 (Vest v. . Cooper) 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
Vest v. . Cooper, 68 N.C. 131 (N.C. 1873).

Opinion

Reads, J.

The matters in controversy were referred to a referee to state an account and report, &c. The referee examined the evidence, stated an account and reported. At the coming in of the report, the defendant upon affidavit moved to refer the matter back with instructions to open the account, on account of newly discovered evidence. Plis. Honor in the exercise of his discretion, granted the motion at the cost of the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed. The question is, does an appeal lie in such a case.

C. C. P., section 299, allows an appeal from every “ order, &c., involving a matter of law or legal inference which affects a substantial right,” <fec., ” or grants or refuses a new trial.”

It is as well settled as anything in the practice, that the Judge who tries a cause may set aside a verdict and grant a new trial for newly discovered evidence, or because the verdict is against the weight of the evidence, or because the' damages are excessive, &c.

And the same is true in regard to a report, which is in the nature of a verdict. And this is done in the exercise of his discretion, from which no appeal lies. Judging from the numerous appeals which have lately come up in such cases, we suppose that the profession have misunderstood the clause in the Code, supra, “ or grants or refuses a new trial.” *133 There seems to be an impression that there may be an appeal from every motion for a new trial; and’the fact is overlooked that it must “involve a matter of law or legal inference,” and not a mere matter of discretion. This will illustrate: Plaintiff recovers of defendant $1,000. Defendant files affidavit that since the trial he has discovered that he can prove the debt-has been paid. His Honor says, I believe your affidavit and I grant a new trial, or I do not believe it, and I refuse a new trial. This isa matter of discretion and no appeal lies. But if he had said, I believe the' affidavit, and if I had the power, I would grant a new trial, •or I do not believe it, but still the law compels me to grant a new trial, this would involve a matter of law, and an appeal would lie. And in such case, all we could do would be to say, You have the power and you must exercise your discretion.

There is no error.

This will be certified.

Per curiam.

Judgment affirmed.

NOTE TO THE PROFESSION.

It is apparent that .a very short record would have been all that was necessary to present the case to this Court, yet there are thirty-five pages of legal cap, the greater part of which is the testimony taken by the referee, his report, -&C. All of which is of no conceivable biso, and involves considerable cost and gross injustice to suitors. This case is only one of many. And we adopt a rule in every case, that the appellant shall pay all cost of irrelevant matter in the record, unlesittappears that he objected to its being put in.

TUSA.DE, J.

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

Related

Jarrett v. Winston Mutual Life Insurance
180 S.E. 663 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1935)
State v. . Ferrell
175 S.E. 91 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1934)
State v. . Edwards
172 S.E. 399 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1934)
State v. . Lea
166 S.E. 292 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1932)
State v. Davis
203 N.C. 316 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1932)
Goodman v. . Goodman
161 S.E. 686 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)
Henderson v. . McLain
59 S.E. 873 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1907)
Faison v. . Williams
28 S.E. 188 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1897)
Edwards v. . Phifer
27 S.E. 79 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1897)
Brummitt v. . McGuire
12 S.E. 191 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1890)
Davenport v. . Terrell
9 S.E. 197 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1889)
Braid v. . Lukins
95 N.C. 123 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1886)
Carson v. . Dellinger
90 N.C. 226 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1884)
Moore v. . Edmiston
70 N.C. 470 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1874)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
68 N.C. 131, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vest-v-cooper-nc-1873.