Barefoot v. Rulnick

113 S.E.2d 921, 252 N.C. 483, 1960 N.C. LEXIS 584
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMay 4, 1960
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 113 S.E.2d 921 (Barefoot v. Rulnick) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

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

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

Related

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
113 S.E.2d 921, 252 N.C. 483, 1960 N.C. LEXIS 584, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barefoot-v-rulnick-nc-1960.