Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

105 N.C. 42

10 S.E 1043

Wallace Bros. v. Douglas

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 5, 1890

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1890-02-05

This was a civil ACTION, heard before Connor, J., at November Term, 1889, Iredell Superior Court, on exceptions to referee’s report. The defendant, among other exceptions, excepted to certain evidence admitted by the referee. The Court sustained the. exception.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently September 1893

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1890-02-05

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Clabk, J.

¶1 after stating the case: The appeal was premature and improvidently taken, and must be dismissed. The plaintiffs should have had their exception noted in the record, and if, on the coming in of the amended report and a final judgment thereon, they find it necessary to appeal, the exception will then be reviewed. It may be that, as they themselves suggest, other evidence may be found to supply the place of that excluded, or when the final judgment is rendered they may not desire to appeal. The Court will not take “two bites at a cherry.” The rule of practice is settled by so many decisions that we only refer to Jones v. Call, 89 N. C., 188; Torrence v. Davidson, 90 N. C., 2; Lutz v. Cline, 89 N. C., 186; Grant v. Reese, 90 N. C., 3; Leak v. Covington, 95 N. C., 193. In Grant v. Reese, the Court say: “Slight attention to the decisions of the Court would prevent miscarriages like the present, and facilitate the administration of justice.”-

¶2 Appeal dismissed.

/105/nc/42 · .json · Public domain