Legal Opinion

Neal v. Old North State Land Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 5, 1893PublishedCited by 4 opinions

The appeal in this case having on motion been dismissed for failure to print the record, the appellant, after notice given, moved to re-instate the same.

1Opinion of the Court

Per Ouriaji :

The additional explanatory affidavit of the Clerk does not alter the case. The motion to re-instate must he denied. The neglect of counsel to have the record printed is the neglect of the party himself and does not excuse. Edwards v. Henderson, 109 N. C., 83, and numerous cases there cited. In that case it is said: “Appellants might as well fail to send up the transcript as not to have it in a condition to be heard by failing to have the 'case and exceptions’ printed.”

Motion Denied.

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Edwards v. Town of HendersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Calvert v. Carstarphen.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
  2. Seawell v. Parsons Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
  3. Holland v. RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
  4. Holland v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904