McGehee v. . Tucker
McGehee v. . Tucker
29 S.E. 833; 122 N.C. 186; 1898 N.C. LEXIS 221
(South Eastern Reporter)
Opinion of the Court
Whether the intestate of the defendant died seized of realty is an indispensable fact to be ascertained before the application of the Statute of Limitations can be determined. The pleadings raise an issue as to that fact, but counsel by agreement reserved the ascertainment thereof and speared a hypothetical proposition of law to the Court. The Court will not entertain fragmentary or premature appeals. Clark’s Code, Section 584, and cases cited. Hinton v. Ins. Co., 116 N. C., 22. As was said by Pearson, C. J., in Hamlin v. Tucker, 12 N. C., 502, the Court will not “take two bites at a cherry.”
Appeal dismissed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.