Wallace Bros. v. Douglas
Cases that cite this one
5 later published cases cite this decision.
- Chemical Co. v. Lackey. (N.C. 1905)
- Kerr v. . Hicks (N.C. 1898)
- Alexander v. . Alexander (N.C. 1897)
- McLean v. . Breece (N.C. 1893)
- McLean v. Breece (N.C. 1893)
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
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.”-
Appeal dismissed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.