Ayscue v. . Barnes

129 S.E. 592, 190 N.C. 859, 1925 N.C. LEXIS 208
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided October 7, 1925·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Pee CueiaM.

Tbe appeal presents no new question of law, or one not heretofore settled by our decisions. Tbe evidence was conflicting on tbe issues of negligence and contributory negligence, resulting in a controversy which tbe jury alone could determine. They have resolved tbe disputed questions of fact against tbe defendant and in favor of tbe plaintiff. There is no reversible error appearing on tbe record. Tbe exception relating to tbe judge’s refusal to accept tbe verdict, as first *860 tendered by tbe jury, cannot be sustained. Willoughby v. Threadgill, 72 N. C., 438. Tbe modification of defendant’s special instructions was not only without prejudice, but- entirely proper under tbe evidence in tbe case. Tbe verdict and judgment must be upheld.

No error.

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

Ayscue v. . Barnes, 129 S.E. 592, 190 N.C. 859, 1925 N.C. LEXIS 208 (N.C. 1925).

129 S.E. 592 (Ayscue v. . Barnes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Allen v. . Yarborough
160 S.E. 833 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)
Oates v. . Herrin
148 S.E. 30 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1929)