Legal Opinion

Cleve v. . Adams

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 4, 1942PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarnhill, J.

The motion made in the original action to set aside the .judgment against Sophronia Wall presented questions of fact and not issues- of fact. It was for the judge to hear the. evidence, find the facts and render judgment thereon. Monroe v. Niven, 221 N. C., 362, and -cases cited. The judgment entered, though so labeled, was not a judg ment of nonsuit. It was a judgment fixing and adjudicating the rights of the parties.

The parties to the motion to set aside the Wall judgment are the parties to this action. Plaintiffs herein, in making the motion in the cause and in instituting this action, had…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. City of Monroe v. NivenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  2. Coltrane v. . LaughlinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
  3. Stevens v. TurlingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
  4. Gorrell v. AlspaughSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
  5. Hampton v. . Spinning CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Harrington v. RiceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  2. Howard v. BoyceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  3. Craver v. . SpaughSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
  4. Houghton v. HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  5. In Re the Will of CoxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API