North Carolina Natural Gas Corp. v. Edens

Supreme Court of North Carolina

North Carolina Natural Gas Corp. v. Edens

114 S.E.2d 236, 252 N.C. 593, 1960 N.C. LEXIS 608

DecidedMay 18, 1960

StatusPublished

This text of 114 S.E.2d 236 (North Carolina Natural Gas Corp. v. Edens) 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

North Carolina Natural Gas Corp. v. Edens, 114 S.E.2d 236, 252 N.C. 593, 1960 N.C. LEXIS 608 (N.C. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The case on appeal contains all or a portion of the testimony of two witnesses, one (Mr. Rose) for the respondent and the other (Mr. McCormick) for the petitioner. Indeed, nothing appears to show that any witness testified to the reasonable market value of [594]*594the land covered by the easement or to the reasonable market value of respondent’s remaining land either before or after petitioner acquired such easement. Obviously, the bulk of the testimony offered at the trial does not appear in the record before us.

Petitioner’s three assignments of error relate to the overruling or sustaining of objections to certain questions asked Mr. Rose or Mr. McCormick. Particular discussion of these assignments is deemed unnecessary. Suffice to say, consideration thereof fails to disclose prejudicial error.

No error.

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

Per Curiam.

The case on appeal contains all or a portion of the testimony of two witnesses, one (Mr. Rose) for the respondent and the other (Mr. McCormick) for the petitioner. Indeed, nothing appears to show that any witness testified to the reasonable market value of [594]*594the land covered by the easement or to the reasonable market value of respondent’s remaining land either before or after petitioner acquired such easement. Obviously, the bulk of the testimony offered at the trial does not appear in the record before us.

Petitioner’s three assignments of error relate to the overruling or sustaining of objections to certain questions asked Mr. Rose or Mr. McCormick. Particular discussion of these assignments is deemed unnecessary. Suffice to say, consideration thereof fails to disclose prejudicial error.

No error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 S.E.2d 236, 252 N.C. 593, 1960 N.C. LEXIS 608, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/north-carolina-natural-gas-corp-v-edens-nc-1960.