Baggett v. Wilson, 152 N.C. 182 (1910)

March 23, 1910 · Supreme Court of North Carolina

152 N.C. 182

W. E. BAGGETT v. ELI R. WILSON.

(Filed 23 March, 1910.)

Reference — Consent—Findings by the Court — Conclusive.

In passing upon the report of a. referee under an order made by consent, directing him to hear and determine all issues and questions of law and fact arising upon the pleadings, the judge may review the'findings of fact and law. 1-Iis rulings upon the facts, when supported by evidence, are conclusive.

Appeal from Guión, J., at January (Special) Term of Samp-SON.

This was a civil action heard upon exceptions to the report of the referee theretofore appointed in the action, by consent. His Honor, upon the exceptions filed, reversed one of the findings of the referee, approved others, and rendered .judgment that the plaintiff, W. E. Baggett, the only party plaintiff in interest, take nothing by his action and pay the costs of the .-action. The plaintiff excepted and appealed.

George E. Butler for plaintiff.

H. A. Grady for defendant.

MANNING, J.

The only point presented by this appeal, conceded by the attorneys- for both plaintiff and defendant, is whether a judge of the Superior Court can review the findings of fact and law by a referee appointed by consent in an action pending in that court, where the order of reference directs the referee “to hear' and determine all issues and questions of law and fact arising upon the pleadings.” The precise question has been decided by this Court, and it has been repeatedly ruled that the judge has such power. Smith v. Hides, 108 N. C., 249, in which several cases- are cited; Blalock v. Mfg. Co., 110 N. C., 99; Dunavant v. R. R., 122 N. C., 999; Cummings v. Swepson, 124 N. C., 579; Henderson v. McLain, 146 N. C., 329; sec. 525, Pell’s Rev. and cases cited under heading, “Findings of Fact.” It is not contended by the plaintiff that there was no evidence to support his Honor’s finding of fact reversing the finding of fact of the referee, but that it was contrary to the weight othe evidence. In Henderson v. McLain, 146 N. C., 329, this Court said: “The rulings of the judge below upon the exceptions to findings of fact are conclusive, there being evidence upon such findings. Dunnavant v. R. R., 122 N. C., 999, and cases there cited.” We conclude there was no error in the judgment apjiealed from, and the same is

Affirmed.