Court Opinion

ID: 9856106
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 06:38:15.625761+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:26:02.607222
License: Public Domain

PARKER, J.,
dissenting. All the parties submitted to Judge Bone, what they called “AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS.” After setting forth 21 paragraphs of facts, this agreed statement of facts ends with this language
“It is agreed that the foregoing facts shall constitute and be the evidence in this case and that trial by Jury is hereby waived and the Judge shall upon said facts determine the rights and liabilities of the parties hereto.”
Then follows the signatures of counsel for all the parties.
Judge Bone’s judgment begins with this language:
“This cause coming on to be heard before Honorable Walter J. Bone, Judge holding the Courts of the Sixth Judicial District, at 10:00 A. M. on the 27th day of June, 1959, at the Courthouse in Nashville, North Carolina, the parties having agreed that the same be heard before said Judge and at said time and place, that trial by jury is waived, that an Agreed Statement of Facts shall constitute and be the evidence in this case and that the Judge upon said facts shall determine the rights and liabilities of the parties hereto, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court and the Court finding facts as follows, to wit:”
According to the record the only evidence before Judge Bone was this “AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS:”
I can find nothing in the briefs filed by counsel to indicate that they, or anyone of them, had any idea that Judge Bone was hearing the case on anything except the “AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS” in accordance with G. S. 1-250 et seq. For instance, the brief filed for appellant Gill has this at the beginning after Question Involved: “STATEMENT OF CASE. This civil action was heard by consent, upon the pleadings and Agreed Statement of Fact.” The brief filed for Indemnity Insurance Company of North America, ap-pellee;. says the first question involved is: “Did the court err: 1. In including Findings of Fact 23 in the judgment, and is it supported by *32the evidence set out in the Agreed Statement of Facts?" The brief of plaintiff appellee has this language: “Under and by virtue of said agreed statement of facts, this action was heard out of turn and out of the district, by consent of the parties, and judgment rendered, etc."
I do not agree with the statement in the majority opinion: “This is not a controversy without action authorized by G. S. 1-250 et seq.”
It is true that the parties may waive a jury trial. G.S. 1-184. When that is done, the Judge shall give his decision in writing, containing a statement of the facts found and the conclusions of law separately. G.S. 1-185. The Agreed Statement of Facts states “trial by jury is hereby waived and the Judge shall upon said facts determine the Hghts and liabilities of the parties hereto.” The beginning of Judge Bone’s judgment states “that trial by jury is waived, that an Agreed Statement of Facts shall constitute and be the evidence in this case and that the Judge upon said facts shall determine the Hghts and liabilities of the parties hereto.” From the above language it seems clear to me that the agreement was that Judge Bone was merely to determine the legal rights and liabilities of the parties upon an Agreed Statement of Facts, and was not authorized to find any further facts or to infer any further facts from those agreed upon. I consider the language used “a trial by jury is waived" as surplusage.
In Sparrow v. Casualty Co., 243 N.C. 60, 89 S.E. 2d 800, it is said:
“Where, as here, a case is tried on an agreed statement of facts, such statement is in the nature of a special verdict, admitting there is no dispute as to the facts, and constituting a request by each litigant for a judgment which each contends arises as a matter of law on the facts agreed, and consequently the court is not permitted to infer or deduce further facts from those stipulated.”
The majority opinion is based on Judge Bone’s finding of fact number 23, to the effect that Y. D. Pendleton, manager of Rich Square Bonded Warehouse, exercised due care in issuing official negotiable warehouse receipts to E. D. Whedbee, etc. This is a finding of fact that Judge Bone had no authority to make. The Agreed Statement of Facts contains no such fact.
As to whether or not Y. D. Pendleton exercised due care under the circumstances is still an open question for decision by a jury, or by a judge under waiver of a jury trial in accordance with G.S. 1-184.
The agreed case lacks completeness. As is said in Trustees v. Banking Co., 182 N.C. 298, 109 S.E. 6: “A case agreed must state all the facts necessary to a decision, which this case does not do.”
I would set aside the judgment, and remand the case for further proceedings. New Bern v. White, 251 N.C. 65, 110 S.E. 2d 446.