Legal Opinion

Pemberton v. City of Greensboro

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 16, 1932PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.

It may be doubted whether the exception is sufficiently definite to enable us to review the different specifications, but however this may be, it is not discernible from the record that any harm has come, or is likely to come, to the defendant by reason of the court’s ruling. Hosiery Mill v. Hosiery Mill, 198 N. C., 596, 152 S. E., 794; Ellis v. Ellis, ibid., 767, 153 S. E., 449.

It is readily conceded that nothing ought to be in a complaint, or remain there over objection, which is not competent to be shown on the hearing. C. S., 506; 21 R. C. L., 452. But the matter can better be determined…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hines v. . Rocky MountSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
  2. Tar Heel Hosiery Mill v. Durham Hosiery MillsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  3. State v. Suncrest Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  4. Ellis v. . EllisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. Penn Dixie Lines, Inc. v. GrannickSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  2. Scott v. . BryanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
  3. Herndon v. . MasseySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  4. Parrish v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  5. Pemberton v. City of GreensboroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API