Haynes v. Eller

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Haynes v. Eller

110 S.E.2d 444, 251 N.C. 84, 1959 N.C. LEXIS 499

DecidedOctober 14, 1959

StatusPublished

This text of 110 S.E.2d 444 (Haynes v. Eller) 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

Haynes v. Eller, 110 S.E.2d 444, 251 N.C. 84, 1959 N.C. LEXIS 499 (N.C. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

In light of the theory of the trial in the court below and the charge of the court, there being no allegations by either party with respect to contributory negligence, it is clearly apparent that the jury found both the plaintiff and the defendant Wayne Garrison guilty of actionable negligence.

[85]*85The exceptions and assignments of error based thereon show no prejudicial error that would justify the awarding of a new trial.

No error.

Higgins, J., not sitting.

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

Per Curiam.

In light of the theory of the trial in the court below and the charge of the court, there being no allegations by either party with respect to contributory negligence, it is clearly apparent that the jury found both the plaintiff and the defendant Wayne Garrison guilty of actionable negligence.

[85]*85The exceptions and assignments of error based thereon show no prejudicial error that would justify the awarding of a new trial.

No error.

Higgins, J., not sitting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

110 S.E.2d 444, 251 N.C. 84, 1959 N.C. LEXIS 499, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/haynes-v-eller-nc-1959.