Barnes v. Security Life & Trust Co.
This text of 50 S.E.2d 2 (Barnes v. Security Life & Trust Co.) 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.
Opinion
The plaintiff offered evidence sufficient to constitute a prima facie case for the jury. Thereupon the defendant offered evidence tending to show that the indebtedness against the policy equaled or exceeded the cash surrender value and that it had exercised the right to cancel the policy, vested in it by the terms of the loan agreement, and *411 had so notified the insured. But these are matters in defense. As to them the burden of proof rests upon the defendant.
A judgment of nonsuit is never permissible in favor of the party having the burden of proof upon evidence offered by him. Hedgecock v. Insurance Co., 212 N. C. 638, 194 S. E. 86. “The burden of proof being on the defendant to prove its defense the court could not adjudge that an affirmative defense is proven, for that involves the credibility of the witnesses, which is a matter for the jury.” Wharton v. Ins. Co., 178 N. C. 135, 100 S. E. 266; Hedgecock v. Insurance Co., supra; MacClure v. Casualty Co., ante, p. 305.
It follows that the judgment of nonsuit must be held for error
Reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
50 S.E.2d 2, 229 N.C. 409, 1948 N.C. LEXIS 327, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barnes-v-security-life-trust-co-nc-1948.