Collins v. . Nall
Supreme Court of North Carolina
had obtained a certiorari up. on an affidavit in which the plaintiff swore, that a petition was filed by him in the county of Wake .against the defendant, under the act of 1809, {Rev. ch. 77o') “ directing how persons injured by the erection of public mills shall in future proceed to recover damages” — that upon the trial a verdict was taken, subject to the opinion of the court upon a question touching the title of the land in the petition mentioned — that thinking the point…
Read the full summary
had obtained a certiorari up. on an affidavit in which the plaintiff swore, that a petition was filed by him in the county of Wake .against the defendant, under the act of 1809, {Rev. ch. 77o') “ directing how persons injured by the erection of public mills shall in future proceed to recover damages” — that upon the trial a verdict was taken, subject to the opinion of the court upon a question touching the title of the land in the petition mentioned — that thinking the point abandoned by the defendant he went home ; but towards the end of the term, accidentally hearing that the point had been…
1Opinion of the Court
RuKKiN, Judge.
I think the motion to dismiss the cer-tiorari must be overruled. It is true, that writ is an extraordinary remedy, ami is grantable, in my opinion, in the discretion of the court. It is not a matter-of-right? as an appeal or a writ of error is. But in- allowing-it as a substitute for an appeal, the courts have always-exercised tlieir discretion very liberally. And in cases; where the party has lost his appeal, by the neglect of an officer of the law, the contrivance of the opposite party, or the improper conduct of the inferior court the cause will be examined upon certiorari…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Howell v. . BarnesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1870
- Barton, Ex ParteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1874
- Chambers v. . SmithSuperior Court of North Carolina · 1796
- Estes v. . HairstonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1827