Rice v. . Gin Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Rice v. . Gin Co.

142 S.E. 782, 195 N.C. 875, 1928 N.C. LEXIS 248

DecidedApril 25, 1928

StatusPublished

This text of 142 S.E. 782 (Rice v. . Gin 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

Rice v. . Gin Co., 142 S.E. 782, 195 N.C. 875, 1928 N.C. LEXIS 248 (N.C. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

This was an action brought by plaintiff against defendant for the recovery of the value of a bale of cotton, alleged to be worth $145.80. The allegations of plaintiff are to the effect that he had stored with defendant a quantity of seed-cotton, in the ginnery building of defendant, for the purpose of being ginned and baled when instructed by defendant to do so. This instruction was violated by defendant, the seed-cotton being ginned and baled and placed on defendant's platform.

It was alleged by defendant that the seed-cotton was received by it and ginned in the ordinary course of business and when baled delivered to plaintiff by being placed on the platform with full notice to plaintiff, this being the usual and only place of delivery. The cotton was stolen or lost from the platform.

The issue submitted to the jury and the answer thereto was as follows: "In what amount, if anything, is defendant indebted to plaintiff? Answer: $140.94 without interest." *Page 876 From a careful examination of the evidence, we think the evidence was sufficient to be submitted to the jury; the probative force was for them.

No error.

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

This was an action brought by plaintiff against defendant for the recovery of the value of a bale of cotton, alleged to be worth $145.80. The allegations of plaintiff are to the effect that he had stored with defendant a quantity of seed-cotton, in the ginnery building of defendant, for the purpose of being ginned and baled when instructed by defendant to do so. This instruction was violated by defendant, the seed-cotton being ginned and baled and placed on defendant's platform.

It was alleged by defendant that the seed-cotton was received by it and ginned in the ordinary course of business and when baled delivered to plaintiff by being placed on the platform with full notice to plaintiff, this being the usual and only place of delivery. The cotton was stolen or lost from the platform.

The issue submitted to the jury and the answer thereto was as follows: "In what amount, if anything, is defendant indebted to plaintiff? Answer: $140.94 without interest." *Page 876 From a careful examination of the evidence, we think the evidence was sufficient to be submitted to the jury; the probative force was for them.

No error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

142 S.E. 782, 195 N.C. 875, 1928 N.C. LEXIS 248, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rice-v-gin-co-nc-1928.