Bechtel v. . Weaver

164 S.E. 338, 202 N.C. 856, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 286
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJune 15, 1932
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 164 S.E. 338 (Bechtel v. . Weaver) 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
Bechtel v. . Weaver, 164 S.E. 338, 202 N.C. 856, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 286 (N.C. 1932).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

If it be conceded that the defendants’ plea in abatement should have been sustained (Brown v. Polk, 201 N. C., 375, 160 S. E., 357), still the correct result has been reached in another way, and the judgment will not be disturbed. Bank v. McCullers, 201 N. C., 440; Rankin v. Oates, 183 N. C., 517, 112 S. E., 32. “A new trial will not he granted when the action of the trial judge, even if erroneous, could by no possibility injure the appellant.” Butts v. Screws, 95 N. C., 215.

This disposition of the matter renders it unnecessary to consider defendants’ appeal.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Hindman v. Appalachian State University
723 S.E.2d 579 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2012)
Goad v. Chase Home Finance, LLC
704 S.E.2d 1 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2010)
Munday v. Bank of Franklin
189 S.E. 779 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1937)
McPherson v. . Williams
170 S.E. 662 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1933)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
164 S.E. 338, 202 N.C. 856, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 286, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bechtel-v-weaver-nc-1932.