Barefoot v. Rulnick

113 S.E.2d 921, 252 N.C. 483, 1960 N.C. LEXIS 584
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided May 4, 1960·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Pee Curiam.

The burden is on appellant to show prejudicial error amounting to the denial of some substantial right. Kennedy v. James, 252 N.C. 434, . S.E. 2d . A careful examination of defendant’s assignments of error discloses no prejudicial error that would justify a new trial. All these assignments of error are overruled. The verdict and judgment will be upheld.

No error.

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

Barefoot v. Rulnick, 113 S.E.2d 921, 252 N.C. 483, 1960 N.C. LEXIS 584 (N.C. 1960).

113 S.E.2d 921 (Barefoot v. Rulnick) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Bright
118 S.E.2d 411 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1961)