Legal Opinion

Kerr v. North Carolina Joint Stock Land Bank

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 1, 1933PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Pee, Cueiaji.

The findings of fact set out in the judgment are supported by the evidence offered at the hearing before the judge of the Superior Court. They are, therefore, conclusive, and not reviewable by this Court. Crye v. Stoltz, 193 N. C., 802, 138 S. E., 167; Turner v. Grain Co., 190 N. C., 331, 129 S. E., 725; Gaster v. Thomas, 188 N. C., 346, 124 S. E., 609. On the finding by the judge that the neglect of the defendant to file an answer to the complaint within'the time prescribed by statute, was not excusable, the motion of the defendant was properly denied. The further finding that…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Roberts v. . AllmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
  2. Manning v. Roanoke & Tar River RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
  3. Gaster v. . ThomasSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
  4. Finlayson v. American Accident Co. of LouisvilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
  5. Burke v. . StokelySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1871

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Moore v. DealSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  2. Johnson v. . SidburySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  3. Stephens Ex Rel. Houston v. ChildersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  4. Craver v. . SpaughSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
  5. Cayton v. . ClarkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937

6 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