Bullock v. . Bullock

14 N.C. 260
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided December 5, 1831·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Ruepin, Judge.

The court is precluded from considering the judge’s charge by the verdjet on the general issue. It is found by the jury that the defendant’s testator did not assume ; which puts the other issue, on the statute of limitations, and the instructions of the Superior Court on it out of the question. As the existence of the debt is negatived, the judgment must of course be affirmed: To this Morisey v. Bunting, (ante 1 vol. 3,) besides other cases, is a direct authority.

Per Curiam.--‘Judgment appirmed.

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

Bullock v. . Bullock, 14 N.C. 260 (N.C. 1831).

14 N.C. 260 (Bullock v. . Bullock) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Moore v. . Edmiston
70 N.C. 510 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1874)