Snowden v. . Bell

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Snowden v. . Bell

80 S.E. 888, 166 N.C. 208, 1914 N.C. LEXIS 366

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedFebruary 18, 1914

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 80 S.E. 888 (Snowden v. . Bell) 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

Snowden v. . Bell, 80 S.E. 888, 166 N.C. 208, 1914 N.C. LEXIS 366 (N.C. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee Cukiam.

This is the second appeal in this action. On the first appeal, which is reported in 150 N. C., 500, we held that it was error to instruct the jury to answer the issues in favor of the plaintiff if they believed the evidence, but after discussing the facts necessary to constitute an adverse user, we said: “Applying these principles, we are of opinion that the plaintiff introduced evidence of an adverse user for more than twenty years, which entitled him to have bis case submitted to the jury, but that it was not of such conclusive character as to warrant a peremptory instruction in favor of the plaintiff.”

Tbe evidence in tbe two records is practically tbe same, and adhering to our former decision, tbe ruling on tbe motion for judgment of nonsuit must be affirmed.

Tbe exceptions to tbe admission of evidence are without merit. It was competent to prove tbat tbe plaintiff directed bis tenants to use tbe lane, as some evidence of an adverse user under claim of right.

No error.

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

Pee Cukiam.

This is the second appeal in this action. On the first appeal, which is reported in 150 N. C., 500, we held that it was error to instruct the jury to answer the issues in favor of the plaintiff if they believed the evidence, but after discussing the facts necessary to constitute an adverse user, we said: “Applying these principles, we are of opinion that the plaintiff introduced evidence of an adverse user for more than twenty years, which entitled him to have bis case submitted to the jury, but that it was not of such conclusive character as to warrant a peremptory instruction in favor of the plaintiff.”

Tbe evidence in tbe two records is practically tbe same, and adhering to our former decision, tbe ruling on tbe motion for judgment of nonsuit must be affirmed.

Tbe exceptions to tbe admission of evidence are without merit. It was competent to prove tbat tbe plaintiff directed bis tenants to use tbe lane, as some evidence of an adverse user under claim of right.

No error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 S.E. 888, 166 N.C. 208, 1914 N.C. LEXIS 366, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/snowden-v-bell-nc-1914.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack