Stokes v. . Cogdell
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal by defendant from W. R. Allen, J., at the June Term, 1910, of "WayNE. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtClark, C. J.
This is an appeal from a judgment upon a writ of habeas corpus awarding the custody of a minor child. The first two exceptions rest upon the ground that “the evidence did not justify the findings of fact.” -This presents the question whether this Court will review the findings of fact by the judge.
Tbe decisions of this Court are uniform that “The findings of fact by the judge, when authorized by law or by consent of parties, are as conclusive as when found by a jury, if there is any evidence to support them.” Matthews v. Fry, 143 N. C., 384; Shoaf v. Frost, 127 N. C., 306; Brafford v. Reed,…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Norton v. . McLaurinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1899
- Harris v. . HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1894
- Matthews v. Fry.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
- State v. . MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1887
- Roberts v. Life Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1896
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- In Re HamiltonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
- McEachern v. . McEachernSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Clegg v. . CleggSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
- In Re the Administration of the Estate of MartinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
- In Re AlbertsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.