Latham v. Hodges
Thomas Latham and D. B. Perry, vs. Francis and John Hodges
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Ruffunt, C. J.
The parties cannot get at their object in the present mode of .proceeding. If they could have entitled themselves to the writ of error, for the alleged error of fact, in the Superior Court, it was only while the judgment against them w7as the power of that Court. Instead of pursuing that course, however, they appealed to this Court, upon the matter of law, so that the judgment, finally rendered against them, was the judgment of this Court, and not that of the Superior Court. Hence this writ cannot *269 be sustained; as error for matter of fact lies only in the Court, in which the record and judgment are, and not to reverse the judgment of another Court, and, especially, of a higher one.
Ter Curiam. Judgment reversed, and motion disallowed
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 5 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.