Legal Opinion

Mitchell v. Barfield

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 9, 1950No. 751PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEeviN, J.

The findings of fact of the judge of the Superior Court bad ample support in the evidence at the trial. In consequence, they must be accepted as final truth upon the appeal to the Supreme Court. Marshall v. Bank, 206 N.C. 466, 176 S.E. 314; Distributing Corp. v. Seawell, 205 N.C. 359, 171 S.E. 354; Eley v. R.R., 165 N.C. 78, 80 S.E. 1064.

In reaching this conclusion, we do not ignore the seven assignments of error based on the refusal of the judge to find facts in accordance with requests of the defendants. These assignments are untenable. When be passed on the requests for findings, the judge…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Kenney v. Building CommissionerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
  2. First National Pictures Distributing Corp. v. SeawellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  3. Hack v. MetzSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1934
  4. Eley v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
  5. Marshall v. Bank of BeaufortSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Jamestown Mut. Ins. Co. v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  2. Jamestown Mut. Ins. Co. v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  3. Application of Rea Construction CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  4. City of Raleigh v. EdwardsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  5. Branch Banking & Trust Company v. GillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975

9 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