Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1895

Salmon Ex Rel. Rogers v. McLean

Salmon Ex Rel. Rogers v. McLean
Supreme Court of North Carolina · Decided February 5, 1895 · Claeic
21 S.E. 178; 116 N.C. 209 (South Eastern Reporter)

Counsel

Mr. L. B. Ohapin, for plaintiff (appellant)., Messrs. T. M. Argo and F. P. Jones, for defendant.

Salmon Ex Rel. Rogers v. McLean

Opinion of the Court

Claeic, J.:

A new trial can not be granted by a justice of the peace {The Code, 865), but in the cases mentioned in The Code, 845, a rehearing may be allowed. Froneberger v. Lee, 66 N. C., 333; Gambill v. Gambill, 89 N. C., 201; Guano Company v. Bridgers, 93 N. C., 439. Though the judgment was first rendered 12 April, 1887, a rehearing was granted and the new judgment was rendered 2 May, 1887. The statute ran from the 2 May because the first judgment was vacated by the rehearing. This action was begun April 30, 1894, which was within the seven years limited by statute. Oode, Sec. 153 (1). The defendant has *211 no ground to complain, for the rehearing was granted on his motion. In instructing the jury that the judgment was barred, there was error.

Error.

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