Connor v. . Mason
This text of 171 S.E. 370 (Connor v. . Mason) 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.
Opinion
Tbe plaintiff brought suit to recover certain personal property which he caused to be seized under proceedings in claim and delivery. Tbe defendant replevied. Tbe jury found that tbe plaintiff is not tbe owner of tbe property, that its value at tbe time of seizure was $600, its present value $300, and that tbe plaintiff is indebted to tbe defendant in tbe sum of $300. It was adjudged that tbe plaintiff recover $600 with interest less $300 to be credited as of tbe time of trial and that tbe recovery in favor of tbe plaintiff, excepting tbe sum of $50 is a lien upon the property described in tbe pleadings. Tbe question is *413 wbetber tbe verdict supports the judgment. It is recited in the judgment as an admission of the defendant that the property when paid for was to be the plaintiff’s. In view of this admission we think the judgment is in substantial compliance with the law.
No error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
171 S.E. 370, 205 N.C. 412, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 572, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/connor-v-mason-nc-1933.