Williams v. Richmond & Danville Railroad
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was a motion to set aside and vacate the judgment rendered' at Duplin Superior Court, August Term, 1891, before BoyJciv, J. The Court found the following facts The summons was served July 7th on the station agent at Goldsboro, and by him duly forwarded to the headquarters of the company at Atlanta, according to regulations; by the managing officer delivered to the General Southern Counsel, and by them, on July 18th, 1891, all the papers were sent to David Schenck, the…
Read the full summary
This was a motion to set aside and vacate the judgment rendered' at Duplin Superior Court, August Term, 1891, before BoyJciv, J. The Court found the following facts The summons was served July 7th on the station agent at Goldsboro, and by him duly forwarded to the headquarters of the company at Atlanta, according to regulations; by the managing officer delivered to the General Southern Counsel, and by them, on July 18th, 1891, all the papers were sent to David Schenck, the counsel of the North Carolina Division ; that by mistake the papers were sent to Mr. Cothran, the counsel for the South…
1Per curiam
Taking all of the circumstances into consideration, we think that the ruling of his Honor was correct, and should be affirmed.
2Cited by8 opinions
- Manning v. Roanoke & Tar River RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
- Lake v. LakeWyoming Supreme Court · 1947
- Poff v. LockridgeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- Nation v. SavelySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1927
- Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. v. EllisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.