State v. Nichols

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. Nichols

86 S.E.2d 202, 241 N.C. 615, 1955 N.C. LEXIS 429

Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided March 9, 1955·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The defendant excepts to and assigns as error the refusal of the court below to permit him to testify to the effect that he employed a lawyer to obtain a divorce for him and was informed that it would require about thirty days to do so; that after the expiration of thirty days from that time, he went home and got married, believing that he was divorced. The exception is without merit.

In the trial below we find no error.

No error.

Barnhill, C. J., and DeviN, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

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

Per Curiam.

The defendant excepts to and assigns as error the refusal of the court below to permit him to testify to the effect that he employed a lawyer to obtain a divorce for him and was informed that it would require about thirty days to do so; that after the expiration of thirty days from that time, he went home and got married, believing that he was divorced. The exception is without merit.

In the trial below we find no error.

No error.

Barnhill, C. J., and DeviN, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

State v. Nichols, 86 S.E.2d 202, 241 N.C. 615, 1955 N.C. LEXIS 429 (N.C. 1955).

Pincite

86 S.E.2d 202 (State v. Nichols) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related