Wm. Froneburger v. . H. D. Lee .

66 N.C. 333
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJanuary 5, 1872
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 66 N.C. 333 (Wm. Froneburger v. . H. D. Lee .) 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
Wm. Froneburger v. . H. D. Lee ., 66 N.C. 333 (N.C. 1872).

Opinion

DiCK, J.

Under our old system of practice and procedure, a Justice of the Peace had a right to grant a new trial when rendered against an absenRparty, if a proper application was made in ten days afterwards. Rev. Code, ch. 62, sec. 15.

*334 The provisions of this Statute have not been materially changed under our new system. C. C. P., sec. 508.

When both parties to an action are present at a trial in a Justice’s Court, and the case is heard and judgment rendered, a new trial 'Cannot be allowed. The party dissatisfied with the judgment can have a remedy only by appeal to the Superior Court. C. C. P., sec. 528.

There was error in the ruling of His Honor. This will be certified to the end that the proper proceedings may be had to set aside the order for a new trial made by the Justice.

Pee CueiaM. Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Salmon Ex Rel. Rogers v. McLean
21 S.E. 178 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1895)
Navassa Guano Co. v. Bridgers
93 N.C. 439 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1885)
Gambill v. . Gambill
89 N.C. 201 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1883)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
66 N.C. 333, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wm-froneburger-v-h-d-lee-nc-1872.