Powell v. Camp Manufacturing Co.

111 S.E. 872, 183 N.C. 676, 1922 N.C. LEXIS 337
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided March 22, 1922·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This case was before us at the Fall Term, 1920, and is reported in 180 N. C., 330-. The facts were set out fully by Walker, J., in delivering the opinion on the former appeal, and need not be repeated here. From a perusal of the record it appears that the case has been tried in substantial confoimity with the law, as heretofore declared, and the present judgment must be affirmed.

No. 223, Powell v. Mfg. Co., being an action for damages arising out of the same fire and caused by the same engine, for like reason must be affirmed. See, also, Williams v. Camp Mfg. Co., 177 N. C., 512.

In both cases we find

No error.

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

Powell v. Camp Manufacturing Co., 111 S.E. 872, 183 N.C. 676, 1922 N.C. LEXIS 337 (N.C. 1922).

111 S.E. 872 (Powell v. Camp Manufacturing Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mintz v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad
65 S.E.2d 120 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1951)
Martin v. Currie
53 S.E.2d 447 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1949)
Murray v. . R. R.
11 S.E.2d 326 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1940)
Murray v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad
218 N.C. 392 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1940)