Legal Opinion

Tilghman v. . R. R.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 5, 1914PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The Court recommends a change in the statute as to selecting expert witnesses.

WALKER, J., dissenting; BROWN, J., concurs in dissent. A large number of the assignments of error have been abandoned by failure of the appellant to make any argument or reference thereto in its brief. Rule 34. This is as it should be. During the progress of the cause counsel, out of the abundance of caution, necessarily take a great many exceptions which on fuller examination cannot be sustained, and in such case they should neither clog the brief nor divert the attention of the Court from the vital errors alleged…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Marcom v. Raleigh & Augusta Air Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1900
  2. Skipper v. Kingsdale Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1912

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Meadows v. Postal Telegraph & Cable Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
  2. Moore v. Director General of RailroadsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1920
  3. Renn v. Seaboard Air Line Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1915

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API