Flowers v. . Glasgow

Superior Court of North Carolina

Flowers v. . Glasgow

2 N.C. 122

Superior Court of North Carolina·Decided October 5, 1794·Published

Opinion

The evidence must be so understood; and they directed the jury that this evidence was sufficient proof of the possession having been in the defendant at that time; but the cause, for another reason, was adjourned.

NOTE. — WILLIAMS, J., said in this case, upon another part of the argument, that he should yield to the decision in Tims v. Potter, 1 N.C. 12, until it should be contradicted by a more full decision to the contrary. It was decided by two judges, ASHE and SPENCER, against his opinion.

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

The evidence must be so understood; and they directed the jury that this evidence was sufficient proof of the possession having been in the defendant at that time; but the cause, for another reason, was adjourned.

NOTE. — WILLIAMS, J., said in this case, upon another part of the argument, that he should yield to the decision in Tims v. Potter, 1 N.C. 12, until it should be contradicted by a more full decision to the contrary. It was decided by two judges, ASHE and SPENCER, against his opinion.

Flowers v. . Glasgow, 2 N.C. 122 (N.C. Ct. App. 1794).

Pincite

2 N.C. 122 (Flowers v. . Glasgow) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.