Carroll v. . James

72 S.E. 81, 156 N.C. 68, 1911 N.C. LEXIS 133
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedSeptember 27, 1911
StatusPublished

This text of 72 S.E. 81 (Carroll v. . James) 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
Carroll v. . James, 72 S.E. 81, 156 N.C. 68, 1911 N.C. LEXIS 133 (N.C. 1911).

Opinion

AlleN, J.,

after stating the case: The charge of his Honor, placing the burden on the plaintiff to prove the item of $112, is erroneous and entitles the plaintiff to a new trial. It would have been correct but for the fact that the defendants allege in their answer that this sum was paid by the plaintiff out of the proceeds of the sale of the tobacco, at the request of the defendants, and the plaintiff admits this in his reply.

*70 Being a fact admitted by tbe pleadings, it was not in controversy, and tbe burden was not on tbe plaintiff to establish it.

Tbe error was tbe result of an inadvertence, as is shown by tbe statement made by tbe presiding judge, which is attached to tbe case on appeal. He says that be overlooked tbe answer of tbe defendants as to tbe $112, and that bis attention was not called to it.

As tbe item is admitted, we would direct it to- be credited on tbe amount recovered by tbe defendants, instead of ordering a new trial, if we bad any means of ascertaining tbe decision of tbe jury with reference to it; but we cannot say, on tbe record, that it has not already been allowed, and as tbe question was submitted to them erroneously, we must order a new trial.

New trial.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
72 S.E. 81, 156 N.C. 68, 1911 N.C. LEXIS 133, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carroll-v-james-nc-1911.