Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

16 N.C. 326

Barnes v. . Dickinson

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 5, 1829

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1829-06-05

From Wayne. This was a bill of review for matter of fact, filed in the Court below. The cause sought to be reviewed was decided in this Court, and is reported ante 273. The bill charged, that since the trial at law, between the same parties, (Law casesr i voL 346,) the Plaintiff had discover'd that the witness Rebecca Hicks had been bribed by the Defendant, and had on that trial been guilty of perjury.

Decided 1829-06-05

Henderson, Chief-Justice.

¶1 — This is a bill of review for error in fact in a former decree, made in this Court. Waiving every other objection, I think that the bill cannot be sustained, because it appears in the bill itself, that the error, or rather the cause of complaint, w as known to the Plaintiff, at the return term of the original bill, time enough for him to have availed himself of it in that suit. For if the bill did not embrace it, it might have been amended ; or it' that could not have been done, it might have been brought before She Court by supplemental bill. The necessity, under which the Plaintiff says ho was placed, of abandoning his injunction, if iie amended his bill, (if in fact it did exist,) would have been obviated by a supplemental bill, leaving the injunction to be sus - tained, if it could by the original. 1 fear that the common idea, that an injunction is given up by an amendment, is carried too far; it is going sufficiently far to *328 say, that an injunction cannot he sustained or propped by an amendment.

Per Curiam.

¶2 — Let the decree of the Court below be affirmed.

/16/nc/326 · .json · Public domain