Walker v. Walker

• Decision Date: 30 June 1864
• Citation: 1 Win. 259,60 N.C. 255
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: JAMES R. WALKER v. SALLY WALKER.

1 Win. 259

60 N.C. 255

JAMES R. WALKER

v.SALLY WALKER.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June Term, 1864.

Parol evidence is admissible to show what matters are submitted to arbitration and what matters are brought to the notice of arbitrators.

An award is avoided by a mistake in law by an arbitrator as to what is submitted to his decision.

The case of Brown vs. Brown, 4 Jones, Rep. 123, cited and approved.

This was an action of debt on award tried before HEATH, Judge, at Fall Term of Orange Superior Court, 1863.

It appeared on the trial that the plaintiff and defendant, on the 23d of March, 1859, chose John U. Kirkland and John Berry to settle a dispute between them by arbitration, and executed an instrument under seal of which the following is a copy:

Know all men by these presents that James R. S. Walker and Sally Walker, both of the County of Orange and State of North Carolina, acknowledge themselves indebted in the sum of five thousand dollars to any person suing for the same good and lawful currency of North Carolina, of which we bind ourselves and our heirs and assigns. In testimony whereof we set our hands and affix our seals, this the 23d March, 1859.

The condition of the above obligation is such whereas James R. S. Walker and Sally Walker have agreed to leave a matter of dispute to referees, as they cannot settle it themselves, viz: John U. Kirkland and John Berry, they are their referees to settle the matter in controversy; James R. S. Walker having his letters examined on trial with other testimony. Sally Walker having the privilege to produce testimony on the trial to rebut the evidence in said letters, with the understanding that the said James R. S. Walker is to leave the mills which is in dispute, surrender to Sally Walker the mill key and leave within ten days after this paper is signed. Then, after the referees hearing the testimony on both sides, shall decide that James R. S. Walker is entitled to damages whatever the damages shall be laid at, the said Sally Walker is to pay to the said Jemes R. S. Walker; but should the referees find, upon examination, that Sally Walker is damaged, instead of James R. S. Walker, then the said James R. S. Walker is to make it good to Sally Walker, whatever it be.

The arbitrators found that the plaintiff had removed from Tennessee to this State at the solicitation of the defendant and in expectation of pecuniary advantages promised by her, and that he had suffered a loss thereby of $500, and that he was not indebted to her on the mill books or otherwise, and they award that she pay him $500, and that he deliver to her the mill books. The plaintiff proved the performance of what he was required to do, both by the dead and the award. The defendant contended that the arbitration had been corruptly conducted, and as evidence of this allegation showed that she had offered evidence before the arbitrators of a battery committed on her by the plaintiff, whereby she insisted she was greatly injured; which the arbitrators refused to hear. The plaintiff contended that this matter was not submitted to arbitration, and offered to show that the only matter submitted was a question of damages alleged to have arisen from the plaintiff's having removed from Tennessee to North Carolina, because of promises made by the...