Seay v. Sentinel Life Insurance
208 N.C. 832
Opinion
The Court being evenly divided in opinion, Glarlcson, J., not sitting, the judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed and stands, according to the uniform practice of appellate courts, as the decision in this case, without becoming a precedent. Com. Co. v. Mfg. Co., 201 N. C., 823, 159 S. E., 411; Raynor v. Ins. Co., 193 N. C., 385, 137 S. E., 137; Jenkins v. Lbr. Co., 187 N. C., 864, 123 S. E., 82; Miller v. Bank, 176 N. C., 152, 96 S. E., 977; Durham v. R. R., 113 N. C., 240, 18 S. E., 208.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Seay v. Sentinel Life Insurance, 208 N.C. 832 (N.C. 1935).
208 N.C. 832 (Seay v. Sentinel Life Insurance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Miller v. Bank of Washington
96 S.E. 977 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1918)
Raynor v. Jefferson Standard Life Insurance
137 S.E. 137 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1927)
Mfg. Co. v. . Mfg. Co.
159 S.E. 411 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)
Town of Durham v. Richmond & Danville Railroad
18 S.E. 208 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1893)
Jenkins v. Suncrest Lumber Co.
123 S.E. 82 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1924)