Martin v. . Boyd
This text of 188 S.E. 78 (Martin v. . Boyd) 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 trial court instructed the jury that under the facts in the instant case, the defendants did not have the right to shoot down plaintiff’s tire in order to stop him. Exception.
Defendants say that had they been armed with process, this right would have existed, ergo the mere fact that they were not armed with *663 process would not make their conduct unlawful. The conclusion is a non sequitur. Holloway v. Moser, 193 N. C., 185, 136 S. E., 375. The defendants were outside the territory in which they are authorized to arrest without warrant. S. v. Sigman, 106 N. C., 728, 11 S. E., 520.
No error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
188 S.E. 78, 210 N.C. 662, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-v-boyd-nc-1936.