Bass v. Seligman, Williams & Ball, Inc.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Bass v. Seligman, Williams & Ball, Inc.

168 S.E. 213, 204 N.C. 775, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 268

DecidedFebruary 22, 1933

StatusPublished

This text of 168 S.E. 213 (Bass v. Seligman, Williams & Ball, Inc.) 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

Bass v. Seligman, Williams & Ball, Inc., 168 S.E. 213, 204 N.C. 775, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 268 (N.C. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

On controverted issues of fact, the jury has responded m favor of the plaintiff. The case seems to have been tried in substantial conformity to the principles of law applicable; and we have discovered no ruling or action of the trial court which we apprehend should be held for reversible error. Even if technical error be conceded, it is regarded as harmless in the light of the whole record. 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

Per Curiam.

On controverted issues of fact, the jury has responded m favor of the plaintiff. The case seems to have been tried in substantial conformity to the principles of law applicable; and we have discovered no ruling or action of the trial court which we apprehend should be held for reversible error. Even if technical error be conceded, it is regarded as harmless in the light of the whole record. The verdict and judgment will be upheld.

No error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 S.E. 213, 204 N.C. 775, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 268, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bass-v-seligman-williams-ball-inc-nc-1933.