State Ex Rel. Pipkin v. McArtan
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Civil action tried at November Term, 1897, of Har-nett Superior Court before Robinson, J. There was a judgment for the defendants and the plaintiffs appealed. In this Court, the appellees moved to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the case on appeal was not served in due time.
1Per curiam
The statute having fixed the time allowed for serving notice of appeal, and cases on appeal and counter cases, the Judge cannot extend time. Woodworking Co v. Southwick, 119 N. C , 611; Hemphill v. Morrison, 112 N. C., 757. It can only be done by consent. Here, counsel on one side swear that consent was given, and the other side deny this, and the alleged agreement must be disregarded. Rule 39; Sondley v. Asheville, 112 N. C., 694; Graham v. Edwards, 114 N. C., 228. The entry on the docket, “20 days,” means noth ing in itself, but if it was an entry the Court was authorized to make, the Judge…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Sondley v. City of AshevilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
- Graham v. . EdwardsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1894
- Hemphill v. . MorrisonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
3Cited by3 opinions
- Illinois Central Railroad v. DoddMississippi Supreme Court · 1913
- Cozart v. Assurance Company.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
- Hemphill v. . MorrisonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893