Bass Ex Rel. Bass v. American Railway Express Co.

126 S.E. 112, 189 N.C. 826, 1925 N.C. LEXIS 406
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided January 24, 1925·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We have heard the arguments of counsel, read the record carefully and gone over the well prepared and exhaustive briefs of the parties. The judge of the Forsyth County Court, in a full and very complete charge, gave fairly the contentions of the parties and charged the law on all the issues, as seems to us, with care and accuracy. The exceptions and assignments of error made by defendant on appeal to the Superior Court were not sustained, and judgment for the plaintiff was confirmed by the Superior Court. Hines v. R. R., 185 N. C., p. 72; Crisp v. Hanover Thread Mill, ante, 89.

We can find

No error.

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

Bass Ex Rel. Bass v. American Railway Express Co., 126 S.E. 112, 189 N.C. 826, 1925 N.C. LEXIS 406 (N.C. 1925).

126 S.E. 112 (Bass Ex Rel. Bass v. American Railway Express Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lawry v. Devine
410 P.2d 761 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1966)