Pendleton v. . Spencer

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Pendleton v. . Spencer

170 S.E. 637, 205 N.C. 179, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 495

DecidedSeptember 20, 1933

StatusPublished

This text of 170 S.E. 637 (Pendleton v. . Spencer) 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

Pendleton v. . Spencer, 170 S.E. 637, 205 N.C. 179, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 495 (N.C. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

The testimony of J". A. Spencer was properly excluded as the consideration for the note was not in issue.

Therefore, the applicability or nonapplicability of C. S., 1795, to the proffered testimony is not necessarily presented by the record. Its competency is urged under authority of Sutton v. Walters, 118 N. C., 495, 24 S. E., 357. Its incompetency is asserted under authority of Benedict v. Jones, 129 N. C., 475, 40 S. E., 223. The point is moot as the testimony was properly excluded on other grounds.

No error.

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

Stacy, C. J.

The testimony of J". A. Spencer was properly excluded as the consideration for the note was not in issue.

Therefore, the applicability or nonapplicability of C. S., 1795, to the proffered testimony is not necessarily presented by the record. Its competency is urged under authority of Sutton v. Walters, 118 N. C., 495, 24 S. E., 357. Its incompetency is asserted under authority of Benedict v. Jones, 129 N. C., 475, 40 S. E., 223. The point is moot as the testimony was properly excluded on other grounds.

No error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

170 S.E. 637, 205 N.C. 179, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 495, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pendleton-v-spencer-nc-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack