Thomas v. Womack, 64–657,.. Thompson v. Berry, 64-81,.. Thompson v. Berry, 64-344,.. Thompson, Moore v., 69-120,. Thompson, Rowland v., 64–714,. Threadgill v. C. C. R. R. Co, 73-178,. Toms v. Warson, 66-417,. Treasurer v. Thompson, 65-406,. Trotter, Garrett v., 65-430,.. Troutman, Lippard v., 72-551, Tucker v. City of Raleigh, 75–267, Turner, Brown v., 70—93,. Turner, Goldsborough v., 67—403,.. Turner v. Richmond & Danville R. R. Co., 70—1, Tweed, Dellinger v., 66-206, Underwood, Claflin v., 75-485,......... University v. McIver, 72–76,.. University v. N. C. R. R. Co., 76–103,. Utley v. Peters, 72-525,. Valentine v. Holleman, 63—475, Valentine, Moore v., 77-188,. Vannoy v. Haymore, 71-128,. Vann v. Pipkin, 77-408,. Vaughan, Purnell v., 77–268,. Von Glahn v. DeRossett, 76–292,. Waldrop v. Green, 63-344,, Walker, McKeithan v., 66-95,... Wallington v. Montgomery, 74-372... Wallis, Logan v., 76–416,.. Walsh v. Hall, 66-233, .122, 317 64 .70, 219, 292, 295 .....295, 309, 321 309 20 104, 254 201 101 207, 209, 316 301 253 90, 164 101 .213, 217, 229, 230, 276 ..12, 91, 93, 99, 117 .16, 27, 28, 42, 56 109 298 134 105 114 .199, 204 ..55, 298, 299 189 .82, 83 240 217 105 95, 304 55, 100 85 8 156 241 301 156 124 252 195 62, 94, 103 62, 95 62 18 23 124 256 125 ..245, 246, 247 95 241 309 210, 226, 230 252 115 100, 101, 121, 205 Williams v. Sharpe, 70-582,. W. & T. R. R. Co. v. Battle, 66-540,.. W. & W. R. R. Co., Powell v., 68, 395,. Wilson v. Arentz, 70-670, Wilson & Shober v. Bank of Lexington,72-621, Wilson v. Barnhill, 64-121,.. Wilson, Henley v., 77-216,.. Wilson & Shober v. Moore, 172-558,. Wilson v. Sparks, 72-208,... Winborne v. Bryan, 73-47, Winchester v. Gaddy, 72-115,.. 123 .210, 310 16 124 267 288 122 56 154 196 ..55, 56, 62, 95 95 133, 135, 143, 167 55 .73, 18, 121 240 195, 253 242 Windley v. Bradway, 77-333,.. Winslow v. Com'rs Perquimans Co., 64-218,. Winslow, Johnson v., 63-552,.. Winslow v. Weith, 66-432, Winslow v. Wood, 70-430,. Winstead, Batts v., 77--238,.. Wittowsky v. Warren, 69-38,. Wood, Waddell v., 64--624,. Wooten v. Maultsby, 69-462,. Wright v. McCormick, 67–27, Wright v. McCormick, 77–158,... Yancey Co., Commissioners of, v., Piercy, 72—181,. Young, Love v., 69-95..... Young v. Phifer, 72-529,.. Young, Sumner v., 65-579.. York, Baldwin v., 71-463.. THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE." WHEREAS, it is ordained by Section 1, Article IV, of the Constitution of North Carolina, that: "The distinction between actions at law and suits in equity and the forms of all such actions and suits, shall be abolished, and there shall be in this State but one form of action for the enforcement or protection of private rights or the redress of private wrongs, which shall be denominated a civil action; and every action prosecuted by the people of the State as a party, against a person charged with a public offence, shall be termed a criminal action. Feigned issues shall also be abolished, and the fact at issue tried by order of court, before a jury." The General Assembly of the State of North Carolina, for the purpose of carrying into effect the said section, and regulating the practice and procedure in civil actions, in the several courts of this State, do enact as follows: The Code of Civil Procedure is one act, and no part of it went into operation before the 24th day of August, A. D. 1868, but it went into effect as a whole, on that day. Ragland v. Currin, 64-355. So much of the Revised Code, in regard to the procedure in the courts as is not inconsistent with, nor superseded by, the Code of Civil Procedure, is still in force. Clerk Office's v. Huffsteller, 67-449. The Code of Civil Procedure is a mere supplement to the practice and procedure established by the Revised Code. Boylston Ins. Co. v. Davis, 74-78. aThe acts constituting the Code of Civil Procedure embraced all that was contained in the volume published under the supervision of the Code Commission in 1868, and entitled "The Code of Civil Procedure," to the close of Title XVIII, Sec. 416, page 153 of that volume, except Title II and Chapter VIII of Title VIII. This has, very properly, been decided by the court, to be one act. The other acts included in that volume, were directed to be published |