Hicks v. Koutro
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtHiggins, J.
The judgment recites the parties waived a jury trial. The Court is bound by the recital. Exception No. 1 is not sustained. There is nothing in the case to show the judgment was entered out of term. The presumption of regularity prevails. Exception No. 2 is not sustained.
The question raised by the plaintiff’s Exception No. 3 presents real difficulty. The pleadings raise issues of fact as to whether the Admin-istratrix C.T.A. has mismanaged the estate and whether a receiver should be appointed on that account. Can the court, by consent, enter a fragmentary judgment settling a part of the case…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Erickson v. StarlingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
- City of Raleigh v. EdwardsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- Horne v. . EdwardsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
- WACHOVIA BANK AND TRUST COMPANY v. WolfeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- Jenkins v. . JenkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Bockweg v. AndersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1993
- Jonesboro United Methodist Church v. Mullins-Sherman Architects, L.L.P.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 2005
- Croom v. Department of CommerceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
- McLean Trucking Co. v. DowlessSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
- State Highway Commission v. CapeCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.