Haltiwanger v. Charlotte Amusement Co.
134 S.E.2d 198, 261 N.C. 180, 1964 N.C. LEXIS 438
Opinion
Plaintiff’s sole assignment of error brought forward and set out in her -brief is the -failure of the court to- -comply with the provisions of G.S. 1-180. The'facts -are not -complicated. We have examined the charge in its entirety and sufficient prejudicial error has not (been made to appear therein to justify a new trial.
The verdict and judgment below will be upheld.
No error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Haltiwanger v. Charlotte Amusement Co., 134 S.E.2d 198, 261 N.C. 180, 1964 N.C. LEXIS 438 (N.C. 1964).
134 S.E.2d 198 (Haltiwanger v. Charlotte Amusement Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Davison-Paxon Co. v. Archer
85 S.E.2d 182 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1954)