Legal Opinion

London v. Commissioners

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 26, 1927PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrogden, J.

When exceptions have been filed to a referee’s report and thereunder the judge finds the facts upon such exceptions, such findings are not reviewable in the Supreme Court, if there is evidence to support them. Miller v. Groome, 109 N. C., 148; Dumas v. Morrison, 175 N. C., 431; Caldwell v. Robinson, 179 N. C., 518; Hardy v. Thornton, 192 N. C., 296; Greer v. Comrs., 192 N. C., 714.

The referee found as a fact: “No action was ever taken by the board of commissioners, acting as a body or in meeting assembled, changing or modifying the written contract.”

The judge overruled this finding of fact…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Caldwell v. . RobinsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1920
  2. Dumas v. . MorrisonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
  3. Miller v. . GroomeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
  4. Fore v. . FeimsterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
  5. Hearne v. Stanly CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Insurance Co. v. . Guilford CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  2. Denson v. Richmond CountyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2003
  3. Iredell County Board of Education v. DicksonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  4. Jefferson Standard Life Insurance v. Guilford CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  5. Town of Bath v. NormanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946

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