Brooks v. Orange Rice Mill Co.

183 N.C. 677
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Brooks v. Orange Rice Mill Co.. Read the opinion of the Court — 182 N.C. 258
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided April 12, 1922·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

There is no reason shown for disturbing-the results of this trial. It was earnestly urged for appellant that there was no evidence in denial of the intervener’s claim of ownership, but this same position was taken on the former trial, and the Court then held, that on the testimony of the intervener, there were facts in evidence challenging its claim, and requiring that the issue be submitted to the jury. See Brooks v. Mill Co., 182 N. C., 258. On practically the same evidence, the court, in pursuance of said decision, submitted the cause to the j ury, who have found, as stated, against the intervener’s claim.

We find in the present trial

No error.

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

Brooks v. Orange Rice Mill Co., 183 N.C. 677 (N.C. 1922).

183 N.C. 677 (Brooks v. Orange Rice Mill Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brooks v. Orange Rice Mill Co.
108 S.E. 725 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1921)