Miller v. Coxe.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
ActioN by N. W. Miller against Frank Cbxe and others, heard by Judge E. B. J ones, at March Term, 1903, of the Superior Court of Rutherford County. From a judgment for the plaintiff the defendants appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtOonnob, J.
The plaintiff insists that the defendant Ooxe has not filed exceptions, assigning error in the judgment of the Court below, as required by section 550 of The Code. Exceptions were filed to the report of the referee, and from his Honor’s judgment overruling-them the defendant appealed.
It would seem from the remarks of Smith, C. J., in Bank v. Manufacturing Co., 96 N. C., 298, and Rhyne v. Love, 98 N. C., 486, that the appellant should have filed exceptions to the action of the Court, pointing out in what respects error was assigned. “It is to be observed that no specific objection is taken to…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Menzel v. Hinton.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
- Traders National Bank v. Lawrence M'f'g Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1887
- Hill v. Hilliard & Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
- Cone v. Hyatt.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
- Rhyne v. . LoveSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1887
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Spain v. . HinesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
- James A. Stogdill, Christopher Determan, Mathew D. Johnson, Alesha Smith And Kirk E. Yentes v. City of Windsor Heights, Iowa, and Municipal Collections of America, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2023
- Scott v. District Court of the Fifth Judicial DistrictNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1906