Ray v. City of Raleigh Fire Department

130 S.E.2d 401, 259 N.C. 291, 1963 N.C. LEXIS 544
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided April 17, 1963·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Defendant’s assignment of error does not present the legal question discussed in defendant’s brief. Rader v. Coach Co., 225 N.C. 537, 35 S.E. 2d 609; Glace v. Throwing Co., 239 N.C. 668, 80 S.E. 2d 759. Even so, it seems appropriate to say that, according to un-contradicted evidence, plaintiff was entitled to the award. The evidence indicates the award involves a doctor’s bill of one hundred dollars and ■a hospital bill of one hundred dollars.

Affirmed.

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

Ray v. City of Raleigh Fire Department, 130 S.E.2d 401, 259 N.C. 291, 1963 N.C. LEXIS 544 (N.C. 1963).

130 S.E.2d 401 (Ray v. City of Raleigh Fire Department) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Glace v. Pilot Throwing Co.
80 S.E.2d 759 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1954)
Rader v. Queen City Coach Co.
35 S.E.2d 609 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1945)