Collins v. Young
| Decision Date | 03 March 1896 |
| Citation | 118 N.C. 106,23 S.E. 1005 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | COLLINS v. YOUNG et al. |
Reference—Waiver of Jury Trial—Findings of Fact—Conclusiveness—Appeal— Assignment of Errors.
1. An order of reference, made at plaintiff's request, is a waiver of his right to a jury trial, and cannot be recalled, except by consent of both parties.
2. Findings of fact by a referee are conclusive on appeal, if there is any evidence to support them.
3. Where no error is assigned, the judgment will be affirmec
Appeal from superior court, Harnett county; Timberlake, Judge.
Action by Hardy Collins against Young Bros. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
L. B. Chapin and W. E. Murchison, for appellant.
F. P. Jones, for respondents.
FAIRCLOTH C. J. At the trial, but before the case was heard, the plaintiff demanded a jury trial, which was refused. In the case sent to this court by his honor, it appears that, when the order of reference was made, the plaintiff interposed no objection, and also that the order was made at the plaintiff's request. This was waiver of the right to a jury trial, which could not be recalled except by consent. Driller Co. v. Worth, 117 N. C. —. 23 S. E. 427, v'Ueie the authorities are collected. The findings of fact by the referee, when there is any evidence, are not reviewable in this court. The exceptions made before the referee in this case are not reviewable here. The case states that the plaintiff excepted to the judgment, but no errors are assigned. So that, in this respect, there is nothing before us Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Belvin v. Raleigh Paper Co
...time it is made Is a waiver of the right to a trial by jury." This case has been cited with approval In Collins v. Young, 118 N. C. 266. 23 S. E. 1005; State v. Mitchell, 119 N. C. 784, 25 S. E. 783. 1020. Holding as we do that the statute of 1897, in this respect, is the same as section 42......
-
Belvin v. Raleigh Paper Co.
...as binding on us as if they had been found by a jury. We cannot review then. Dunavant v. Railroad Co., 122 N.C. 999, 29 S.E. 837; Collins v. Young, supra; Wilson Cotton Mills C. C. Randleman Cotton Mills, 115 N.C. 475, 20 S.E. 770. This brings us to the question of lien, and, if a lien, to ......
- Bank v. Howell Et Ux