Grant v. . Newsom
Supreme Court of North Carolina
CONTROVERSY without action under C. C. P., § 315, heard at Spring Term, 1879, of Northampton Superior Court, before Eure, J. The plaintiffs are James W. Grant, administrator of Lewis B. Hill, deceased, and Matilda J. Hill, widow; and the defendants are James W. Newsom, sheriff, and W. H. Hughes, executor of W. M. Crocker, deceased.
Read the full summary
CONTROVERSY without action under C. C. P., § 315, heard at Spring Term, 1879, of Northampton Superior Court, before Eure, J. The plaintiffs are James W. Grant, administrator of Lewis B. Hill, deceased, and Matilda J. Hill, widow; and the defendants are James W. Newsom, sheriff, and W. H. Hughes, executor of W. M. Crocker, deceased. At fall term, 1869, Hughes, as executor aforesaid, obtained judgment against Lewis B. Hill for the sum of $1,025.83, in an action to recover a debt contracted prior to the first of January, 1865, and executions were regularly issued thereon. On the 14th of…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, C. J.
If the case were properly before us we should find little difficulty in determining the questions intended to be presented. The cases cited for the appellant, and the provisions of the statutes referred to, leave little room to douht as to any of them. McCarson v. Richardson, 1 Dev. & Bat., 561; Aycock v. Harrison, 65 N. C., 8; Acts 1870-71, ch. 43, § 7; C. C. P., § 261. But we do not undertake to decide them, for the reason that the cause was not properly instituted in the superior court, and consequently is not properly before us on this appeal. The case agreed between the parties as “…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Henry J. Heryey & Co. v. EdmundsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1873
- Aycock Ex Rel. Isler v. HarrisonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1871
3Cited by3 opinions
- Ruffin v. . RuffinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
- Finney v. . CorbettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
- City of Wilmington v. AtkinsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1883