Opinion · Nclaw North Carolina

GREEN v. DAWSON, 92 N.C. 61 (1885)

ARNOLD GREEN v. JOHN T. DAWSON., 92 N.C. 61 (N.C. 1885)

Type: Opinion
Court: North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Date: 1885-01-01
Topic: general

GREEN v. DAWSON, 92 N.C. 61 (1885) ARNOLD GREEN v. JOHN T. DAWSON.Supreme Court of North Carolina (February Term, 1885.) Appeal — Statement of the Case. Where no statement of the case accompanies the record, the judgment will be affirmed, unless upon looking into the record it is found that there is a want of jurisdiction, or it is apparent from the whole case that the plaintiff is entitled to no relief.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed GREEN v. DAWSON, 92 N.C. 61 (1885). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

GREENv. DAWSON,92 N.C. 61(1885)

ARNOLD GREEN v. JOHN T. DAWSON.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

(February Term, 1885.)

Appeal — Statement of the Case.

Where no statement of the case accompanies the record, the judgment will be affirmed, unless upon looking into the record it is found that there is a want of jurisdiction, or it is apparent from the whole case that the plaintiff is entitled to no relief.

(Meekins v. Tatem,79 N.C. 546;Turner v. Foard,83 N.C. 683, cited and approved).

CIVIL ACTION, tried on appeal from the judgment of a justice of the peace, at Fall Term, 1882, of CRAVEN Superior Court, beforeMcKoy, J., and a jury.

There was a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff.

Appeal by the defendant.

Messrs. Strong Smedes, for the plaintiff.Messrs. Nixon, Simmons Manly, for the defendant.Page 62

ASHE, J.

This was a civil action begun before a justice of the peace and carried by appeal to the Superior Court for the county of Craven, where, at the Fall term, 1882, of the Superior Court for said county, the case was tried beforeMcKoy, Judge, and a jury, when there was a verdict and judgment rendered in behalf of the plaintiff, from which the defendant appealed to this court.

The action was brought before the justice to recover one bale of cotton, the property of the plaintiff, which he alleged had been wrongfully detained by the defendant to plaintiff's damage sixty dollars.

There was a judgment before the justice for fifty dollars' damages, and in the Superior Court the verdict was for fifty-four dollars, and the judgment for the same amount.

The appellant in this case has failed to comply with the requirements of the Code in taking an appeal — sec. 550 of the Code, C. C. P., 311, requires that the party appealing to the court shall prepare a concise statement of the case, embodying the instructions of the judge as signed by him, and the request of counsel of the parties for instructions, c. This was not done in this case, and we are not informed upon what ground the appeal was taken. There are no exceptions taken and no errors pointed out. In such a case it is the uniform practice of this court to affirm the judgment, unless in looking into the record it is found that there is a want of jurisdiction, or, upon the whole case, it is apparent that the plaintiff is entitled to no relief.Meekins v. Tatem,79 N.C. 546;Turnerv. Foard,83 N.C. 683.

There is no error, and the judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed.

No error. Affirmed.Page 63