Stockton v. Wolverine Gold Mining Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
MotioN in tbe cause to set aside a judgment by default and inquiry, beard by Guión, J., at February Term, 1907, of tbe Superior Court of' RutheRKobd County. Motion granted, and plaintiff appealed. Tbe facts sufficiently appear in tbe opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtClark, C. J.
Appeal from an order setting aside a judgment by default and inquiry for excusable neglect, under Revisal, sec. 513 (Code, 274). Upon the facts found, wliicb finding is conclusive on us, the Judge decides whether, as a matter of law, there was or was not excusable neglect. Prom this conclusion of law an appeal lies. Norton v. McLaurin, 125 N. C., 185; Pepper v. Clegg, 132 N. C., 313.
Under The Code, 274, if the Judge correctly adjudged that' there was excusable neglect, then whether be should set aside the judgment rested in bis unreviewable discretion. Morris v. Insurance Co., 131 N. C., 213,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Norton v. . McLaurinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1899
- Manning v. Roanoke & Tar River RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
- Jarman v. . SaundersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1870
- Leduc v. . SlocombSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1899
- Mauney v. . GidneySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1883
3Cited by12 opinions
- Cahoon v. . BrinkleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
- Dehoff v. . BlackSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
- Wynne v. . ConradSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
- Wynne v. ConradSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
- Hill v. Huffines Hotel Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.