Wallace Bros. v. Douglas

10 S.E. 1043, 105 N.C. 42

Opinion

Clabk, J.

after stating the case: The appeal was premature and improvidently taken, and must be dismissed. The plaintiffs should have had their exception noted in the record, and if, on the coming in of the amended report and a final judgment thereon, they find it necessary to appeal, the exception will then be reviewed. It may be that, as they themselves suggest, other evidence may be found to supply the place of that excluded, or when the final judgment is rendered they may not desire to appeal. The Court will not take “two bites at a cherry.” The rule of practice is settled by so many decisions that we only refer to Jones v. Call, 89 N. C., 188; Torrence v. Davidson, 90 N. C., 2; Lutz v. Cline, 89 N. C., 186; Grant v. Reese, 90 N. C., 3; Leak v. Covington, 95 N. C., 193. In Grant v. Reese, the Court say: “Slight attention to the decisions of the Court would prevent miscarriages like the present, and facilitate the administration of justice.”-

Appeal dismissed.