Atkinson v. City of Asheville

169 S.E. 801, 205 N.C. 36, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 453
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided June 28, 1933·Published

Opinion

*37 Stacy, C. J.

There is allegation to the effect, and the evidence permits the inference, though it may not compel the conclusion, that the sale in question was without adequate warrant of law; that the price paid was grossly excessive; that at least two of the city officials, to the knowledge of the other defendants, were financially interested in the transaction; and that the interests of the city of Asheville were not properly eared for by those of the defendants charged with such duty.

This evidence, it would seem, is sufficient to carry the case to the jury under the principles announced in Brown v. R. R., 188 N. C., 52, 123 S. E., 633, S. v. Williams, 153 N. C., 595, 68 S. E., 900, and differentiates it from Harrison v. New Bern, 193 N. C., 555, 137 S. E., 582, cited and relied upon by defendants.

¥e refrain from a discussion of the evidence, as its credibility is for the jury.

Reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Atkinson v. City of Asheville, 169 S.E. 801, 205 N.C. 36, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 453 (N.C. 1933).

169 S.E. 801 (Atkinson v. City of Asheville) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Harrison v. City of New Bern
137 S.E. 582 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1927)
State v. . Williams
68 S.E. 900 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1910)
Brown v. . R. R.
123 S.E. 633 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1924)