McLean v. Rulane Gas Co.

193 S.E. 702, 212 N.C. 543, 1937 N.C. LEXIS 366

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We carefully considered the case of Lawson v. Langley, 211 N. C., 526, when before this Court. The defendant in its brief says, in reference to the Lawson case, supra, and other cases: “In the face of these apparently adverse former adjudications, the appellant prosecutes this appeal only because it believes it is about to be deprived of a substantial legal right. It believes its contention ought to prevail even though it should require the review, modification, or even the overruling of former adjudications.”

This statement would meet with the approval of this Court if we were of the opinion that the other eases were not correctly decided. This case is governed by the Lawson case, supra, and the judgment of the court below is

Affirmed.