Poole v. Copland, Inc.

487 S.E.2d 552, 346 N.C. 282
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided June 5, 1997·No. No. 145PA97·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Upon consideration of plaintiffs petition for discretionary review and defendant’s (Copland, Inc.) petition for discretionary review, the following order is entered: The petitions are allowed 5 June 1997 for the limited purpose of addressing the issues raised in the petitions as to the applicability of the “thin skull” rule and the instruction given by the trial court. All other issues requested for review are denied 5 June 1997.

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

Poole v. Copland, Inc., 487 S.E.2d 552, 346 N.C. 282 (N.C. 1997).

487 S.E.2d 552 (Poole v. Copland, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Schillaci v. First Fidelity Bank
709 A.2d 1375 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1998)