Hood ex rel. United Bank & Trust Co. v. Tilley

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Hood ex rel. United Bank & Trust Co. v. Tilley

209 N.C. 842

DecidedJanuary 22, 1936

StatusPublished

This text of 209 N.C. 842 (Hood ex rel. United Bank & Trust Co. v. Tilley) 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

Hood ex rel. United Bank & Trust Co. v. Tilley, 209 N.C. 842 (N.C. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

A careful examination of the assignments of error on this appeal fails to disclose any prejudicial error for which the plaintiff is entitled to a new trial. There was evidence tending to show agreements by the payee of the note sued on as alleged in the answers, and breaches of these agreements resulting in damages to the endorsers in excess of the amount due on the note.

The judgment is affirmed.

No error.

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

Per Curiam.

A careful examination of the assignments of error on this appeal fails to disclose any prejudicial error for which the plaintiff is entitled to a new trial. There was evidence tending to show agreements by the payee of the note sued on as alleged in the answers, and breaches of these agreements resulting in damages to the endorsers in excess of the amount due on the note.

The judgment is affirmed.

No error.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

209 N.C. 842, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hood-ex-rel-united-bank-trust-co-v-tilley-nc-1936.