From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Austin v. Clarke

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jan 1, 1874
70 N.C. 458 (N.C. 1874)

Summary

In Austin v. Clarke, 70 N.C. 458, Bynum, J., speaking for the Court, said: "The Code of Civil Procedure invests the court with ample powers in all questions of practice and procedure, both as to amendments and continuances, to be exercised at the discretion of the judge (335) presiding, who is presumed best to know what orders and what indulgence will promote the ends of justice in any particular case."

Summary of this case from Penniman v. Daniel

Opinion

(January Term, 1874.)

All questions of practice and procedure as to amendments and continuances arising on a trial in the Court below, are in the discretion of the presiding Judge, from whose judgment thereon there is no appeal.

CIVIL ACTION, motion to file an amended answer, tried by Moore, J., at the Fall Term, 1873, of the Superior Court of EDGECOMBE County.

Battle Son for appellant.

No Council Contra, in this Court.


The plaintiff, Treasurer of Edgecombe County sued the defendant, the former Chairman of the Court of Pleas and Quarter Sessions of that county, for the balance of a fund in his hands, belonging to the county. Defendant answers the complaint, and the plaintiff demurred to the answer. His Honor sustained the demurrer, whereupon the plaintiff moves for judgment, and defendant moves for time to file amended answer. The plaintiff's motion is refused and time given to defendant.

From this judgment plaintiff appealed.


The C. C. P. invests the Court with ample powers, in all questions of practice and procedure, both as to amendments and continuances, to be exercised at the discretion of the Judge (459) presiding, who is presumed, best, to know what orders and what indulgence will promote the ends of justice, in each particular case. with the exercise of this discretion, we cannot interfere, and it is not the subject of appeal. C. C. P., sec. 133.

There is no error.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed.

McCurry v. McCurry, 82 N.C. 298; Gilchrist v. Kitchen, 86 N.C. 22; Kendall v. Briley 86 N.C. 58; Long v. Logan, 86 N.C. 538; Penniman v. Daniel, 93 N.C. 334; Jaffray v. Bear, 98 N.C. 59; Clemmons v. Field, 99 N.C. 402; Griffin v. Light Co., 111 N.C. 438; Woodcock v. Merrimon, 122 N.C. 735; S. v. Dewey, 139 N.C. 560; Bernhardt v. Dutton, 146 N.C. 208; Church v. Church, 158 N.C. 566; S. v. Sauls, 190 N.C. 813.


Summaries of

Austin v. Clarke

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jan 1, 1874
70 N.C. 458 (N.C. 1874)

In Austin v. Clarke, 70 N.C. 458, Bynum, J., speaking for the Court, said: "The Code of Civil Procedure invests the court with ample powers in all questions of practice and procedure, both as to amendments and continuances, to be exercised at the discretion of the judge (335) presiding, who is presumed best to know what orders and what indulgence will promote the ends of justice in any particular case."

Summary of this case from Penniman v. Daniel
Case details for

Austin v. Clarke

Case Details

Full title:ROBT. H. AUSTIN, COUNTY TREASURER, v. HENRY T. CLARKE

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Jan 1, 1874

Citations

70 N.C. 458 (N.C. 1874)

Citing Cases

Penniman v. Daniel

4. So, where an order of publication was made, but by an oversight in the clerk it was not done, and the…

McCurry v. McCurry

They do not impute to plaintiff any punishable crime. ( Austin v. Clark, 70 N.C. 458; State v. Lindsey, 78…