Edwards v. . Edwards

138 S.E. 925, 193 N.C. 850, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 499
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMay 18, 1927
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 138 S.E. 925 (Edwards v. . Edwards) 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
Edwards v. . Edwards, 138 S.E. 925, 193 N.C. 850, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 499 (N.C. 1927).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The controversy on trial narrowed itself to issues of fact, which the jury alone could determine. A careful perusal of the record leaves'us with the impression that the ease has been heard and determined substantially in accord with the principles of law applicable, and that the validity of the trial should be sustained. All matters in dispute have been settled by the verdict, and no action or ruling on the part of the trial court has been discovered by us which we apprehend should be held for reversible error.

There is a sharp conflict in the evidence on the issue of liability, but this was purely a question of fact; the jury has determined the matter against the plaintiff; there is no reversible error appearing on the record; the exceptions relating to the admission and exclusion of evidence, and those to the charge, must all be resolved in favor of the validity of the trial; the case presents no new question of law, or one not heretofore settled by our decisions; it only calls for the application of old principles to new facts. The verdict and judgment must be upheld.

No error.

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

Related

State v. . Rhinehart
183 S.E. 388 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1936)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
138 S.E. 925, 193 N.C. 850, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 499, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/edwards-v-edwards-nc-1927.