Isenhour v. . Kimball

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Isenhour v. . Kimball

150 S.E. 925, 197 N.C. 795, 1929 N.C. LEXIS 388

DecidedNovember 20, 1929

StatusPublished

This text of 150 S.E. 925 (Isenhour v. . Kimball) 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

Isenhour v. . Kimball, 150 S.E. 925, 197 N.C. 795, 1929 N.C. LEXIS 388 (N.C. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

A careful perusal of the record leaves us with the impression that the evidence is not sufficient to hold the feme defendant liable, as a partner with her husband, for the plaintiffs’ claim. It follows, therefore, that the appellant’s motion for judgment of nonsuit should have been allowed.

It would serve no useful purpose to set out the evidence in detail, as we deem it insufficient to support a finding of partnership, and this renders the other questions academic.

Beversed.

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

Per Curiam.

A careful perusal of the record leaves us with the impression that the evidence is not sufficient to hold the feme defendant liable, as a partner with her husband, for the plaintiffs’ claim. It follows, therefore, that the appellant’s motion for judgment of nonsuit should have been allowed.

It would serve no useful purpose to set out the evidence in detail, as we deem it insufficient to support a finding of partnership, and this renders the other questions academic.

Beversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

150 S.E. 925, 197 N.C. 795, 1929 N.C. LEXIS 388, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/isenhour-v-kimball-nc-1929.