Legal Opinion

Keith v. Silvia

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 8, 1952PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtValbNtiNE, J.

Conceding without deciding that the defendant’s appeal is not premature and fragmentary, we proceed to a discussion of the other question presented by this appeal. Were plaintiff’s exceptions to the referee’s report properly filed ?

When an appeal is certified to this Court, the Superior Court loses jurisdiction of all matters involved in the appeal until action is taken here and the opinion of this Court is certified back to the Superior Court. Hole v. Greyhound Corp., 227 N.C. 374, 42 S.E. 2d 407; Manufacturing Co. v. Arnold, 228 N.C. 375, 45 S.E. 2d 577; In re Puett’s Will, 229 N.C. 8, 47…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Hoke v. Atlantic Greyhound Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
  2. Manufacturing Co. v. . ArnoldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
  3. Bailey v. McPhersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  4. Green v. Fidelity-Phenix Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  5. In Re Will of PuettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Patrick v. HurdleCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API