North Carolina State Highway Commission v. Swann

Supreme Court of North Carolina

North Carolina State Highway Commission v. Swann

144 S.E.2d 17, 265 N.C. 345, 1965 N.C. LEXIS 985

DecidedSeptember 22, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 144 S.E.2d 17 (North Carolina State Highway Commission v. Swann) 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 State Highway Commission v. Swann, 144 S.E.2d 17, 265 N.C. 345, 1965 N.C. LEXIS 985 (N.C. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

PeR CuRiAM.

The defendants assign as error the admission of certain evidence offered by the plaintiff and the exclusion of certain evidence offered by the defendants. The assignments are not sustained insofar as they relate to the evidence admitted by the court. The evidence appears to have been competent for the purposes for which it was offered.

Insofar as the assignments relate to the evidence which the court excluded, the assignments cannot be sustained for the reason that the record fails to disclose what the witnesses would have testified to if permitted. Hence, error in the exclusion of evidence does not appear. N. C. State Highway Comm. v. Privett, 246 N.C. 501, 99 S.E. 2d 61.

The refusal of the court to set aside the verdict was discretionary and, in the absence of abuse is not subject to review. In the trial and judgment, we find

No error.

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

PeR CuRiAM.

The defendants assign as error the admission of certain evidence offered by the plaintiff and the exclusion of certain evidence offered by the defendants. The assignments are not sustained insofar as they relate to the evidence admitted by the court. The evidence appears to have been competent for the purposes for which it was offered.

Insofar as the assignments relate to the evidence which the court excluded, the assignments cannot be sustained for the reason that the record fails to disclose what the witnesses would have testified to if permitted. Hence, error in the exclusion of evidence does not appear. N. C. State Highway Comm. v. Privett, 246 N.C. 501, 99 S.E. 2d 61.

The refusal of the court to set aside the verdict was discretionary and, in the absence of abuse is not subject to review. In the trial and judgment, we find

No error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

144 S.E.2d 17, 265 N.C. 345, 1965 N.C. LEXIS 985, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/north-carolina-state-highway-commission-v-swann-nc-1965.