Barnett v. City of Elizabeth City
This text of 222 N.C. 760 (Barnett v. City of Elizabeth City) 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
A careful perusal of tbe record leaves us with tbe impression tbat tbe demurrer to tbe evidence was properly sustained, if not upon tbe principal issue of liability, Houston v. Monroe, 213 N. C., 788, [761]*761197 S. E., 571; Pace v. Charlotte, 221 N. C., 245, 19 S. E. (2d), 871, then for failure to give written notice of claim as required by tbe city charter. Trust Co. v. Asheville, 207 N. C., 162, 176 S. E., 257; Pender v. Salisbury, 160 N. C., 363, 76 S. E., 228. In either event, the result is an affirmance of the judgment of nonsuit.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
222 N.C. 760, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barnett-v-city-of-elizabeth-city-nc-1943.