We are of opinion that the nonsuit was properly directed, and ought to stand—the plaintiff not having adopted that mode of recovery sanctioned by law.
Standley v. Hodges, 1 N.C. 330, 1 Cam. & Nor. 330 (1801)
Dec. 1801
·
North Carolina Court of Conference
1 N.C. 330, 1 Cam. & Nor. 330
December Term, 1801.
Isaac Standley vs. Richard Hodges.
This cause came from Newbern Superior Court on the following case. The defendant and one Abraham Bush had a suit depending in the Superior Court of Law for the district of Newbern, in which the present defendant was plaintiff, and which was determined in the term of March, 1795. The defendant Hodges prevailed in that sun: The plaintiff Standley was summoned and attended as a witness for Hodges, and took out tickets for his attendance, but did not file them with the clerk. The present plaintiff Standley, after the determination of the suit between Hodges and Bush, warranted the present defendant Hodges for his attendance, and the cause was removed by Certiorari to this Court. The plaintiff *331was proceeding on the trial to give evidence to support his cause at common law, as for work and labour done, but was stopped and non-suited by the court, with leave to save the following question for the opinion of the Judges, viz.
Whether, prior to the act of Assembly passed in the year 1796, ch. 12. a witness had a right to charge the party at whose instance he had been summoned and attended, for such attendance, as at common law, for work and labour done; or must for his remedy resort to the party cast, in the manner prescribed by the act of Assembly passed in 1783, ch. 12?