Lewis v. . Frye

175 S.E. 698, 207 N.C. 852, 1934 N.C. LEXIS 507
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided September 19, 1934·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Pbb Curiam.

When this cause was considered by the Court upon a former appeal in Lewis v. Archbell, 199 N. C., 205, it was held that a cause of action was alleged and that the case “should be submitted to a jury with proper instructions from the court.” The evidence in the present case was substantially similar to that adduced at the former hearing. An examination of the exceptions relating to the competency of certain evidence discloses no reversible error. The contentions of the parties were fairly arrayed by the trial judge and the jury correctly instructed as to the rules of law governing liability. Indeed, the record presents a sharply controverted issue of fact, which the jury has determined.

Affirmed.

ScheNCK, 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

Lewis v. . Frye, 175 S.E. 698, 207 N.C. 852, 1934 N.C. LEXIS 507 (N.C. 1934).

175 S.E. 698 (Lewis v. . Frye) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ramsey v. Camp
119 S.E.2d 209 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1961)
Bennett v. Southern Railway Co.
191 S.E. 240 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1937)