In Re Pierce
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal by respondent from 0. H. Allen, J., at August Term, 1913, of DupliN.
1Opinion of the Court
Clark, 0. J.
Judgment nisi for $40 Laving been entered against W. ~W. Pierce as defaulting witness under Revisal, 1643, on notice to show cause, the judgment was made absolute. The court found the facts: “W. W. Pierce was duly subpmnaed as a witness for the defendant in the case of I. F. Hill et al. v. W. M. Faison et al., to attend the term of the Superior Court of Duplin which began 25 November, 1912. He was notified that he need not attend till Friday, 29 November, on which day he attended. He was a practicing lawyer, and appeared in cases which were ready for trial in Wayne Superior Court,…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Brookdale Mill, Inc., and Lehigh River Mill, Inc. v. Warren J. Rowley and John P. ReadCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1954
- Krites v. . PlottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
- DENC, LLC v. Philadelphia Indemnity Ins.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2022
- Silicon Knights, Inc. v. Epic Games, Inc.District Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2012
- Rio Grande Gas Company v. GilbertNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1971
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.