Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1890

Owens v. . Paxton

Owens v. . Paxton
Supreme Court of North Carolina · Decided February 5, 1890 · Clare
11 S.E. 375; 106 N.C. 480 (South Eastern Reporter)
Owens v. . Paxton

Cases that cite this one

6 later published cases cite this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Clare, J.:

To the certiorari in this case the Judge returns that the amended answer has been lost, and his notes of the trial also, and that, in consequence, he is unable to make up or settle case on appeal. The appellant moves thereupon for a new trial. The loss of the amended answer of itself would not support this motion, as it might be supplied by proper proceedings. Nichols v. Banning, 91 N. C., 4. Nor would the mere fact of the Judge’s inability to settle the case of itself be sufficient. Simmons v. Andrews, at this term. *481 But it appears in addition, in this case, that there has been no laches on the part of the appellant.

Under such circumstances a new trial must be ordered. Burton v. Green, 94 N. C., 215; Commissioners v. Steamship Co., 98 N. C., 165.

New trial.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.