Edmunds v. . Allen

49 S.E.2d 416, 229 N.C. 250, 1948 N.C. LEXIS 461
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided September 22, 1948·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

While there may have been some slight error in the trial, none appears on exceptive assignment of error which justifies another hearing. The controversy narrowed itself largely to issues of fact, determinable alone by the jury.

The motion to set aside the verdict for excessiveness was addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court, and is not reviewable on the showing here made. Hawley v. Powell, 222 N. C., 713, 24 S. E. (2d), 523; Johnston v. Johnston, 213 N. C., 255, 195 S. E., 807; Cole v. R. R., 211 N. C., 591, 191 S. E., 353; Goodman v. Goodman, 201 N. C., 808, 161 S. E., 686.

The verdict and judgment will be upheld.

No error.

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

Edmunds v. . Allen, 49 S.E.2d 416, 229 N.C. 250, 1948 N.C. LEXIS 461 (N.C. 1948).

49 S.E.2d 416 (Edmunds v. . Allen) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mintz v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad
65 S.E.2d 120 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1951)