Concrete Steel Co. v. Rose

149 S.E. 555, 197 N.C. 464, 1929 N.C. LEXIS 269

• Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
• Decided: September 25, 1929
• Status: Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Conceding, without deciding, that tbe judgment may have been irregularly entered, still it appears that tbe correct result has been reached, and no barm can come from allowing the judgment to stand. Sucb was the course pursued in Rankin v. Oates, 183 N. C., 517, 112 S. E., 32. It would seem that as the appealing defendant is not entitled to recover against the plaintiff on bis counterclaim, any error committed on the trial was harmless. Cherry v. Canal Co., 140 N. C., 422, 53 S. E., 138. “A new trial will not be 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.

Tbe action of the trial court in dismissing the counterclaim and awarding judgment in favor of the plaintiff will be.upheld.

Affirmed.