Phillipse v. . Higdon
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was a rule against the defendants to show cause why a constable should not be allowed to amend his return of a levy of a Justice’s execution on land, returned to the County Court, so as to make the description comply with the requirements of the statute.
Read the full summary
This was a rule against the defendants to show cause why a constable should not be allowed to amend his return of a levy of a Justice’s execution on land, returned to the County Court, so as to make the description comply with the requirements of the statute. Upon an appeal from the County to the Superior Court, the case was tried before Ellis, Judge, at Haywood, on the last Spring Circuit, when the following appeared to be the facts shown by the transcript of the record sent up to this Court: — ■ “ The levy of the constable was endorsed upon a Justice’s judgment in the following words : — c…
1Opinion of the CourtPeaks On, J.
Our jurisdiction in regard to amendlnents in the Court below, is confined to tlie question of power ; with its discretion in the exercise of the power, supposing the Court below to have it, we have no concern.
The subject may be divided into three classes : 1. Every Court has ample power to permit amendments in the process and pleadings of any suit pending before it. Quiett v. Boon, 5 Ire. 9. 2. Every Court of record has ample power, after a suit is determined, to amend its own record, that is, the journal or memorial of its own proceedings, kept by the Court or its clerk, by inserting what…
2Cited by12 opinions
- State v. CannonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
- R. R. v. . ReidSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
- Mann v. . MannSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
- Ricaud v. Alderman.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
- Oliver v. . Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.