Bell v. Denny Roll & Panel Co.

188 S.E. 621, 210 N.C. 813, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 232
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided December 16, 1936·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The motion for judgment of nonsuit was properly denied. Appellant complains that the following question propounded by plaintiff’s counsel while selecting the jury was prejudicial: “Is any member of the jury an agent of any insurance company doing a bonding business ?” The court found that the question was asked in good faith. The record states: “To this finding the defendant excepted for that there was no basis in fact for the finding.” There was no motion for a mistrial at the time. The counsel’s question to the jury was less pointed than that in Starr v. Oil Co., 165 N. C., 587. While evidence that a defendant carried indemnity insurance is incompetent (Luttrell v. Hardin, 193 N. C., 266), the propriety of a question propounded in good faith, whether any of the prospective jurors is engaged in the insurance business, ordinarily, must be left to the sound discretion of the trial judge to prevent prejudice to either party. Goss v. Williams, 196 N. C., 213; Fulcher v. Lumber Co.,. 191 N. C., 408; Scott v. Bryan, ante, 478.

An examination of the other exceptions which appellant noted and brought forward in its appeal fails to show any error warranting us in, disturbing the result.

No error.

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

Bell v. Denny Roll & Panel Co., 188 S.E. 621, 210 N.C. 813, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 232 (N.C. 1936).

188 S.E. 621 (Bell v. Denny Roll & Panel Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Luttrell v. . Hardin
136 S.E. 726 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1927)
Fulcher v. Pine Lumber Co.
131 S.E. 9 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1926)
Goss Ex Rel. Goss v. Williams
145 S.E. 169 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1928)
Starr v. Southern Cotton Oil Co.
81 S.E. 776 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1914)