Ranco Industrial Corp. v. Patelos Door Corp.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Ranco Industrial Corp. v. Patelos Door Corp.

193 S.E.2d 386, 17 N.C. App. 155, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 1603

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedDecember 20, 1972

DocketNo. 728DC810

StatusPublished

This text of 193 S.E.2d 386 (Ranco Industrial Corp. v. Patelos Door Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ranco Industrial Corp. v. Patelos Door Corp., 193 S.E.2d 386, 17 N.C. App. 155, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 1603 (N.C. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

GRAHAM, Judge.

Plaintiff’s assignments of error to the admission of testimony by the individual defendant as to the representations made by plaintiff’s agent when the spray was purchased are overruled.

The findings of fact made by the trial judge are supported by the evidence and must be sustained. The $271.30 awarded defendants is no more than they were entitled to, as a matter of law, under the court’s findings of fact. Under these circumstances, plaintiff was not prejudiced by the fact the court may have applied an inappropriate measure of damages. Cf. Motors, Inc. v. Allen, 11 N.C. App. 381, 181 S.E. 2d 134.

No error.

Judges Hedrick and Vaughn concur.

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