Mangum v. . Rogers
This text of 24 S.E.2d 265 (Mangum v. . Rogers) 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.
Opinion
The defendant’s appeal presents the sole question as to whether there was sufficient evidence to carry the case to the jury. Since we are of the opinion that the evidence is plenary for this purpose, it follows that the exceptions to the court’s refusal to grant the defendant’s motion for a judgment as in case of nonsuit under the provisions of C. S., 567, cannot be sustained.
The plaintiff’s appeal is only from the finding of the jury upon the third issue, which related to the measure of damage fixed at one thousand dollars. We have examined the exceptions set out in the plaintiff’s brief, and are of the opinion that no error prejudicial to the plaintiff was committed either in the rulings of the court upon the admission and exclusion of evidence, or in the charge to the jury.
Since no new questions are presented on this appeal, it is not deemed necessary or expedient to discuss the exceptions set out in detail.
In the trial before the Superior Court we find
No error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
24 S.E.2d 265, 222 N.C. 761, 1943 N.C. LEXIS 427, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mangum-v-rogers-nc-1943.