Legal Opinion

Hughes v. Lundstrum

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided July 23, 1969No. 695SC333PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, J.

The first assignment of error was to the action of the trial judge in interrupting the direct examination of the plaintiff in order to permit defense counsel to conduct a voir dire examination in the absence of the jury. At the time plaintiff was in the process of describing to the jury what occurred immediately prior to the automobile striking the bridge. The defense counsel interrupted and suggested to the judge that on a previous trial, the plaintiff had testified pertaining to the accident and then on cross-examination had stated that he did not know those things of his own knowledge and…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Wagoner v. North Carolina RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  2. State v. . StansellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
  3. Bailey v. North Carolina R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
  4. Everett v. Receivers of Richmond & Danville RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
  5. Ballew v. Asheville & East Tennessee RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Siders v. GibbsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
  2. Jarvis Ex Rel. Frenck v. Sanders Ex Rel. PittCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1977
  3. Brake v. HarperCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1970
  4. Zahren v. Maytag Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978

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

Powered by the Exa API