Harris v. Smith
216 N.C. 352
Opinion
Viewing the evidence in its most favorable light for the plaintiff, as we are required to do on motion to nonsuit, it appears to be sufficient to carry the case to the jury, albeit the damages shown would seem to be slight or only nominal. See Gulley v. Raynor, 185 N. C., 96, 116 S. E., 171; Perry v. Kime, 169 N. C., 540, 86 S. E., 337; Machine Co. v. Tobacco Co., 141 N. C., 284, 53 S. E., 885; Herring v. Armwood, 130 N. C., 177, 41 S. E., 96; Spencer v. Hamilton, 113 N. C., 49, 18 S. E., 167.
Reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Harris v. Smith, 216 N.C. 352 (N.C. 1939).
216 N.C. 352 (Harris v. Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Herring v. Armwood.
57 L.R.A. 958 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1902)
Spencer v. . Hamilton
18 S.E. 167 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1893)
Gulley v. . Raynor
116 S.E. 171 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1923)
Machine Co. v. . Tobacco Co.
53 S.E. 885 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1906)
Perry v. . Kime
86 S.E. 337 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1915)