Wilson v. . Allsbrook

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Wilson v. . Allsbrook

168 S.E. 676, 204 N.C. 479, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 170

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedApril 5, 1933

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 168 S.E. 676 (Wilson v. . Allsbrook) 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

Wilson v. . Allsbrook, 168 S.E. 676, 204 N.C. 479, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 170 (N.C. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

This is the same case that was before us at the last term, 203 N. 0., 498, opinion filed 9 November, 1932. Error having-been found in the judgment of the Superior Court, the cause was remanded with direction that the order of confirmation be vacated and further proceedings had according to the usual course and practice of the court.

Plaintiffs moved, upon said opinion and judgment being certified down, that the order of confirmation be vacated, without more, thus seeking to have the case tried before a jury. The court declined to sign the judgment tendered on this motion, but remanded the cause “in accordance with the opinion of the Supreme Court” to the referee for additional findings and supplement report. This was within his authority, the original reference having been by consent. Morisey v. Swinson, 104 N. C., 555, 10 S. E., 754; Driller Co. v. Worth, 117 N. C., 515, 23 S. E., 427; Flemming v. Roberts, 77 N. C., 415.

The order sending the cause back to the referee was perforce tantamount to vacating the previous order of confirmation. Of course, the plaintiffs are entitled to notice and a hearing before the referee, with right of appeal to the court in case his additional findings are adverse. As thus construed, we perceive no cause for complaint on the part of the plaintiffs.

Affirmed.

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

Stacy, C. J.

This is the same case that was before us at the last term, 203 N. 0., 498, opinion filed 9 November, 1932. Error having-been found in the judgment of the Superior Court, the cause was remanded with direction that the order of confirmation be vacated and further proceedings had according to the usual course and practice of the court.

Plaintiffs moved, upon said opinion and judgment being certified down, that the order of confirmation be vacated, without more, thus seeking to have the case tried before a jury. The court declined to sign the judgment tendered on this motion, but remanded the cause “in accordance with the opinion of the Supreme Court” to the referee for additional findings and supplement report. This was within his authority, the original reference having been by consent. Morisey v. Swinson, 104 N. C., 555, 10 S. E., 754; Driller Co. v. Worth, 117 N. C., 515, 23 S. E., 427; Flemming v. Roberts, 77 N. C., 415.

The order sending the cause back to the referee was perforce tantamount to vacating the previous order of confirmation. Of course, the plaintiffs are entitled to notice and a hearing before the referee, with right of appeal to the court in case his additional findings are adverse. As thus construed, we perceive no cause for complaint on the part of the plaintiffs.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 S.E. 676, 204 N.C. 479, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 170, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilson-v-allsbrook-nc-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack