Copeland v. Howard
172 N.C. 842
Opinion
The evidence was properly excluded, because in direct contradiction of the terms of the writing. Walker v. Venters, 148 N. C., 388; Basnight v. Jobbing Co., 148 N. C., 350.
No error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Copeland v. Howard, 172 N.C. 842 (N.C. 1916).
172 N.C. 842 (Copeland v. Howard) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Basnight v. Southern Jobbing Co.
62 S.E. 420 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1908)
Walker v. . Venters
62 S.E. 510 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1908)