Love v. . Moody
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Civil action, for the recovery of a tract of land, brought to the Superior Court of Haywood county, Spring Term, •1871, and removed on the affidavit of the defendant, to the Superior Qrart of Transylvania, where it was tried before Cloud, J., at Pall Term, 1871. The trial in the Court below commenced on Tuesday and continued until late the ensuing Saturday night — the jury being allowed to separate at tbe adjournments of the Court, upon receiving the usual charge, not to…
Read the full summary
Civil action, for the recovery of a tract of land, brought to the Superior Court of Haywood county, Spring Term, •1871, and removed on the affidavit of the defendant, to the Superior Qrart of Transylvania, where it was tried before Cloud, J., at Pall Term, 1871. The trial in the Court below commenced on Tuesday and continued until late the ensuing Saturday night — the jury being allowed to separate at tbe adjournments of the Court, upon receiving the usual charge, not to talk with any one concerning the subject of the trial, nor allow any one to speak to them thereof, nor converse about the…
1Opinion of the CourtEeade, J.
The record proper sets forth that there was a verdict for the defendant. And then, “ Eule for new trial. Eule made absolute. New trial granted.” So that, from the record, it does not appear for what cause, a new trial was granted.
The “ case ” for this Court sets forth, that “ the plaintiff moved for a new trial on two affidavits, copies of which are hereunto appended marked A and B.” And the defendant also offered affidavits which are appended. But it is not found by his Honor what facts are established by the affidavits. There was no use in sending up the affidavits. If any facts were to be…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cited by7 opinions
- Coharie Lumber Co. v. BuhmannSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
- State v. . SmallwoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1878
- State v. . BestSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892
- Pharr v. Atlanta & Charlotte Air Line Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
- Moore v. . EdmistonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1874
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.