Porter v. Jackson Gold Mining Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Porter v. Jackson Gold Mining Co.

155 S.E. 926, 199 N.C. 815, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 279

DecidedNovember 26, 1930

StatusPublished

This text of 155 S.E. 926 (Porter v. Jackson Gold Mining Co.) 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

Porter v. Jackson Gold Mining Co., 155 S.E. 926, 199 N.C. 815, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 279 (N.C. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Pek CuRiam.

The plaintiff brought suit against the defendants for the sum of $3,900 for services alleged to have been performed under a contract made in the month of October, 1927. The defendants denied liability, Newby alleging that he had paid the plaintiff the entire amount he had agreed to pay and set up a counterclaim against the plaintiff for $640.87. When the plaintiff had introduced his evidence and rested the defendants moved for judgment of nonsuit and the motion was allowed. The plaintiff excepted and appealed.

We affirm the judgment of nonsuit as to the Jackson Gold Mining Company, but in view of the admission in Newby’s answer in reference to his agreement with the plaintiff and the plaintiff’s testimony in respect to it we are of opinion that as to Newby the judgment of non-suit should be set aside.

Judgment affirmed as to Jackson G-old Mining Company and reversed as to Newby.

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

Pek CuRiam.

The plaintiff brought suit against the defendants for the sum of $3,900 for services alleged to have been performed under a contract made in the month of October, 1927. The defendants denied liability, Newby alleging that he had paid the plaintiff the entire amount he had agreed to pay and set up a counterclaim against the plaintiff for $640.87. When the plaintiff had introduced his evidence and rested the defendants moved for judgment of nonsuit and the motion was allowed. The plaintiff excepted and appealed.

We affirm the judgment of nonsuit as to the Jackson Gold Mining Company, but in view of the admission in Newby’s answer in reference to his agreement with the plaintiff and the plaintiff’s testimony in respect to it we are of opinion that as to Newby the judgment of non-suit should be set aside.

Judgment affirmed as to Jackson G-old Mining Company and reversed as to Newby.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

155 S.E. 926, 199 N.C. 815, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 279, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/porter-v-jackson-gold-mining-co-nc-1930.