Hensley v. Harris

89 S.E.2d 155, 242 N.C. 599, 1955 N.C. LEXIS 637
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedSeptember 21, 1955
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 89 S.E.2d 155 (Hensley v. Harris) 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
Hensley v. Harris, 89 S.E.2d 155, 242 N.C. 599, 1955 N.C. LEXIS 637 (N.C. 1955).

Opinion

PeR Cukiam.

Plaintiff produced ample evidence to require the submission of issues to a jury. Etheridge v. Etheridge, 222 N.C. 616, 24 S.E. 2d 477. To claim the benefits of G.S. 20-71.1, it was necessary for the plaintiff to show that she instituted her action within twelve months after the accident. For this purpose she offered the paper or document on which appeared the summons, the affidavit, the warrant of attachment, and the return of the officers. Appellant did not move that the admission of the document be limited to this purpose, and it does not appear in the record that the contents of the writ of attachment were ever read to the jury. Exception thereto is without merit.

The defendant has had a fair trial in which the court made a commendably accurate application of the provisions of G.S. 20-71.1, and the jury has decided, the facts adverse to the defendant. As no reversible error is made to appear, the judgment entered in the court below must be

Affirmed.

WiNboene and HiggiNS, JJ., 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

Related

Lane v. Dorney
108 S.E.2d 55 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1959)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
89 S.E.2d 155, 242 N.C. 599, 1955 N.C. LEXIS 637, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hensley-v-harris-nc-1955.