Flintall v. Charlotte Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtDenny, C.J.
The appellant assigns as error several excerpts from the charge of the court below applicable to the first and second issues. We have carefully considered these assignments of error and in our opinion when the charge is considered contextually with respect to .these issue®, the jury could not -have been misled to the prejudice of the defendant. Kennedy v. James, 252 N.C. 434, 113 S.E. 2d 889; Keener v. Beal, 246 N.C. 247, 98 S.E. 2d 19; Vincent v. Woody, 238 N.C. 118, 76 S.E. 2d 356; Wyatt v. Coach Co., 229 N.C. 340, 49 S.E. 2d 650.
In 45 C.J.S., Insurance, section 601, page 417, it is said…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Keener v. BealSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- Vincent v. WoodySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
- LaVecchia v. North Carolina Joint Stock Land Bank of DurhamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Davis v. VaughnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
- Morris v. TateSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Pedrick v. Peoria & Eastern RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1967
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
- State v. JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- Cutts v. CaseySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- North Carolina National Bank v. BurnetteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.