Mills v. National Sur. Co.
| Decision Date | 27 May 1926 |
| Docket Number | 230. |
| Citation | 133 S.E. 172,192 N.C. 52 |
| Parties | MILLS v. NATIONAL SURETY CO. et al. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Appeal from Superior Court, Onslow County; Barnhill, Judge.
Action by the State, on the relation of H. L. Mills, administrator of the estate of Ernest Lee Mills and of Ernest Lee Mills deceased, against the National Surety Company and others. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiff appeals. Appeal dismissed.
Civil action to recover damages for an alleged negligent and wanton killing of plaintiff's intestate by the defendant J. R Gurganus, sheriff of Onslow county. From a verdict exculpating the defendant from any and all liability, and judgment rendered thereon, the plaintiff appeals, assigning errors.
Where time for settling case on appeal was extended by consent beyond time allowed by Supreme Court rules, without application for certiorari, appeal will be dismissed.
Shaw Jones & Jones, of Kinston, for appellant.
John D Warlick and E. W. Summersill, both of Jacksonville, for appellees.
This case was tried at the November term, 1925, Onslow superior court, and resulted in a verdict and judgment in favor of the defendant. The plaintiff gave notice of appeal to the Supreme Court. By consent, plaintiff was allowed 45 days within which to prepare and serve statement of case on appeal, and the defendants were allowed 30 days thereafter to file exceptions or counter statement of case. Later this time was extended by mutual consent, and on April 12, 1926, the case was settled by agreement of counsel and filed in this court on April 24, 1926. There was no application for a writ of certiorari in the meantime. State v. Farmer, 188 N.C. 243, 124 S.E. 562. The appeal must be dismissed for failure to comply with the rules. Stone v. Ledbetter, 133 S.E. 162, at the present term. It should have been docketed here not later than February 16, 1926, 14 days before the call of the Sixth district, the district to which it belongs. Trust Co. v. Parks, 191 N.C. 236, 131 S.E. 637.
We again call the attention of the profession to the fact that the rules governing appeals are mandatory and not directory. The court has not only found it necessary to adopt them, but equally necessary to enforce them and to enforce them uniformly. The single modification sanctioned by the decisions is that, where from lack of sufficient time or other cogent reason the case is not ready for hearing in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pruitt v. Wood
......Park, 195. N.C. 609, 143 S.E. 139; State v. Crowder, 195 N.C. 335, 142 S.E. 222; Mills v. Surety Co., 192 N.C. 52,. 133 S.E. 172; People's Bank & Trust Co. v. Parks, 191 N.C. 263, 131 ......
-
Pentuff v. Park
...... in tendency, by the following recent authorities:. Covington v. Hosiery Mills, 195 N.C. 478, 142 S.E. 705; State v. Crowder, 195 N.C. 335, 142 S.E. 222;. State v. Taylor, 194 ... 154, 129 S.E. 195; State v. Farmer, 188 N.C. 243,. 124 S.E. 562; Mills v. National Surety Co., 192 N.C. 52, 133 S.E. 172. . . No. sufficient cause having been ......
-
Baker v. Hare
...of any unusual time in preparing the case on appeal. People's Bank & Trust Co. v. Parks, 191 N.C. 263, 131 S.E. 637; Mills v. Surety Co., 192 N.C. 52, 133 S.E. 172. The adjective law is not to be enforced harshly or oppressively, but rather in a spirit of liberality, to the end that justice......
-
State v. Harris
...... appeal, therefore, must be dismissed for failure to comply. with the rules. Mills v. Surety Co., 192 N.C. 52,. 133 S.E. 172; Stone v. Ledbetter, 191 N.C. 777, 133. S.E. 162. . . ......