Legal Opinion

Godwin v. Hinnant

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 20, 1959No. 250PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRodman, J.

Plaintiff assigns as error the order of Judge Fountain overruling -his motion for an affirmance of the amended report of the referee' for that no exceptions had been filed thereto within the time allowed by Judge Paul.

Judge Fountain had a right, in his discretion, to extend the time for filing the exceptions. The time limited in Judge Paul’s order was not intended to have greater force than the statutory provision limiting the time to file exceptions. G.S. 1-195. It did not impair the authority given to Judge Fountain by G.S. 1-152 to extend the time. White v. Price, 237 N.C. 347, 75 S.E. 2d…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Keystone Driller Co. v. WorthSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1895
  2. Glenn Ex Rel. Glenn v. City of RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  3. Gilchrist v. . KitchenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1882
  4. Hawkins Ex Rel. Hawkins v. SimpsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  5. Booker v. Town of HighlandsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State v. HewettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
  2. Whiteside v. McCarsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
  3. Therrell v. FreemanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  4. Westmoreland v. GregorySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  5. Wilson Ford Tractor, Inc. v. Massey-Ferguson, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1992

1 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