Gaskins v. . Lancaster

183 S.E. 364, 209 N.C. 301, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 466
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided January 22, 1936·Published

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.,

after stating the case: Was it error, upon a volte face by defendant, to refuse to undo in May what was done at his instance in February? The defendant invokes the sanction applied in Thompson v. Funeral Home, 208 N. C., 178, 179 S. E., 801. Plaintiff relies upon the doctrine announced in Rand v. Gillette, 199 N. C., 462, 154 S. E., 746. The motion was addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court, and is not reviewable on appeal. Goodman v. Goodman, 201 N. C., 808, 161 S. E., 686.

Appeal dismissed.

Devin, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

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

Gaskins v. . Lancaster, 183 S.E. 364, 209 N.C. 301, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 466 (N.C. 1936).

183 S.E. 364 (Gaskins v. . Lancaster) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Rand v. . Gillette
154 S.E. 746 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1930)
Thompson v. Johnson Funeral Home
179 S.E. 801 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1935)
Goodman v. . Goodman
161 S.E. 686 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)