From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mott v. Ramsay

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Feb 1, 1884
90 N.C. 372 (N.C. 1884)

Opinion

(February Term, 1884.)

Excusable Negligence.

The sickness of an attorney is a sufficient excuse for want of diligence in perfecting an appeal.


Since the opinion was filed in this case, dismissing the appeal [reported ante, 29], the defendant has filed affidavits satisfactorily showing that so far from having been guilty of laches in perfecting his appeal, he used all possible diligence in his endeavors to have it perfected, but failed to do so in consequence of the illness of his attorney.

Being of the opinion that his neglect was entirely excusable, the judgment rendered in the case at this term is set aside, and the case will stand upon the docket as if no judgment had been rendered.

Judgment accordingly.


Summaries of

Mott v. Ramsay

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Feb 1, 1884
90 N.C. 372 (N.C. 1884)
Case details for

Mott v. Ramsay

Case Details

Full title:MOTT v. RAMSAY

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Feb 1, 1884

Citations

90 N.C. 372 (N.C. 1884)

Citing Cases

Francks v. Sutton

No error. Affirmed. Cited: Pickens v. Fox, 90 N.C. 372; Winborne v. Byrd, 92 N.C. 10; Taylor v. Pope, 106…

English v. English

No error. Affirmed. Cited: Mauney v. Gidney, 88 N.C. 203; Churchill v. Ins. Co., 88 N.C. 208; Pickens v. Fox,…