Smithwick v. Colonial Pine Co.

154 S.E. 917, 199 N.C. 431, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 137
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided September 17, 1930·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

The judgment will be affirmed on authority of what was said in Lee v. Produce Co., 197 N. C., 714, 150 S. E., 363.

The case of Burgin v. R. R., 115 N. C., 673, 20 S. E., 473, strongly relied upon by the defendant, is easily distinguishable, the character of the allegations in the two complaints being quite different.

Affirmed.

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

Smithwick v. Colonial Pine Co., 154 S.E. 917, 199 N.C. 431, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 137 (N.C. 1930).

154 S.E. 917 (Smithwick v. Colonial Pine Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Scott v. Ætna Life Insurance
169 S.E. 801 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1933)