White v. Rucker
| Decision Date | 18 September 1963 |
| Docket Number | No. 25,25 |
| Citation | 132 S.E.2d 327,260 N.C. 226 |
| Parties | John Quincy WHITE, Jr. v. Mary Owens RUCKER, and Alex Rudolph Perry, and Joseph Isreal Perry. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
John T. Chaffin, Elizabeth City, for plaintiff-appellant.
Russell E. Twiford, Elizabeth City, for defendant-appellee Rucker.
LeRoy, Wells & Shaw, Elizabeth City, for defendants-appellees Perry.
The crucial (factual) questions were for determination by the jury. We find nothing sufficient to indicate the jury failed to understand and apply the pertinent principles of law.
We have considered each of plaintiff's thirty-eight assignments of error. Conceding technical error in certain respects, a careful review of the evidence and charge leaves the impression there was no error sufficient to amount to a denial of a substantial right or to constitute a sound basis for awarding a new trial.
No error.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Curry v. Case
...234 So.2d 695; Blakely v. Pahler, Fla.App.1971, 253 So.2d 140; Anderson v. Glass, 19 Ill.App.2d 414, 153 N.E.2d 863; White v. Rucker, 260 N.C. 226, 132 S.E.2d 327; Briley v. Austad, S.Ct.N.D.1961, 108 N.W.2d 696; Agren v. Keller, 9 A.D.2d 1000, 194 N.Y.S.2d ...