Dilling Cotton Mills v. Lowell Cotton Yarn Co.

Per Curiam:. Tbe referee, to wbom tbis action was referred for trial, found as a fact tbat “no enforceable contract was entered into by and between tbe plaintiff and defendant on or about 31 January, 1918, tbe basis of defendant’s counterclaim.” He therefore concluded as a matter of law tbat tbe defendant is not entitled to recover any damages of plaintiff as a counterclaim. To tbis finding of fact and conclusion of law defendant excepted. Tbe judge overruled these exceptions, and defendant upon its appeal to tbis Court assigns same as error. Tbe referee’s conclusion of law tbat defendant was not entitled to recover damages of plaintiff was manifestly correct, if there was no error in bis finding of fact. There was evidence at tbe bearing before tbe referee sufficient to support bis finding of fact, which was approved by tbe trial judge. Such finding is therefore not reviewable upon appeal to tbis Court. Sanders v. Griffin, 191 N. C., 453, and cases cited. “It is tbe accepted position witb us tbat tbe findings of fact by a referee, concurred in by tbe judge, are conclusive when there is competent evidence to sustain them.” Comrs. v. Abee Bros., 175 N. C., 701. Tbe assignment of error cannot be sustained. Tbe judgment is Affirmed.