Whitley, Guardian, C. v. . Alexander, Adm'r, C.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was a civil aotioN on a guardian bond, tried before his Honor, Jnde Sohenolc, at Spring Term, 1875, of MecKleNbubg Superior Court, on exceptions by plaintiffs and defendants to the report of the Clerk, to whom it had been referred to take certain accounts.
Read the full summary
This was a civil aotioN on a guardian bond, tried before his Honor, Jnde Sohenolc, at Spring Term, 1875, of MecKleNbubg Superior Court, on exceptions by plaintiffs and defendants to the report of the Clerk, to whom it had been referred to take certain accounts. The statement of the case for this Court, made up by the counsel of the parties in the Court below, is so complicated, that, to a proper understanding of the questions intended to be raised and presented for the decision of this Court, it is deemed best to publish the same without alteration or abridgement ; and that too, although the…
1Opinion of the CourtRodMAN, J.
After some discussion, it was agreed by counsel that there Was no material difference between the facts as found by the referee, and by the Judge on review. It is therefore unnecessary to consider whether the Judge had the right to review the finding of facts by the referee.
The case has been complicated by the agreement of the parties, by Which several actions to which different defences are made, and rules somewhat different may apply, are united in one record. We will consider the exceptions to the report as to the assets in the hands of the defendant, A. A. Alexander, as administrator of…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Hardy and Co. v. . Turnage and TurnageSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
- Pulliam v. PulliamUnited States Circuit Court · 1881
- Delamothe v. . LaneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1816