Legal Opinion

Waters v. . Boyd

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 18, 1920PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Appeal by plaintiff from Bond, J., at September Term, 1919, of Beaufort.

1Opinion of the CourtClark, C. J.

Tins is an action submitted without controversy under Rev., 803. This statute must be strictly construed, Arnold v. Porter, 119 N. C., 123; Grandy v. Gulley, 120 N. C., 177. It requires that the affidavit must set out that “The controversy is real and the proceedings in good faith to determine the rights of the parties.” The affidavit in this case merely sets out that "The controversy between them is genuine, and is submitted to the court to determine the rights of the parties.” This is not a compliance with the statute. In like manner, the absence of the words “in good faith” on an appeal in…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Bates v. . LillySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1871
  2. Blake v. . BlakeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
  3. Millikan v. . FoxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1881
  4. S. v. . BrambleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
  5. Arnold v. . PorterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1896

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Edmondson v. HendersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  2. Peel v. MooreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  3. Consolidated Realty Corp. v. KoonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
  4. Wagoner v. . SaintsingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
  5. Edney v. . MatthewsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940

4 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