Legal Opinion

Williams v. . Williams

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 1, 1944PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBabNhill, J.

The court below failed to instruct tbe jury as to tbe law applicable to tbe evidence offered by tbe defendant tending to show that at tbe time of tbe alleged agreement sbe was mentally incapable of consenting to or acquiescing in a separation. This is tbe basis of defendant’s primary exception.

Tbe meaning of tbe terms “separation” and “separate and apart” has been fully and sufficiently discussed in a number of recent decisions of this Court. Lee v. Lee, 182 N. C., 61, 108 S. E., 352; Woodruff v. Woodruff, 215 N. C., 685, 3 S. E. (2d), 5; Byers v. Byers, 222 N. C., 298; Byers v. Byers, 223 N.…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Byers v. ByersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
  2. Woodruff v. . WoodruffSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
  3. Byers v. . ByersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  4. Wray v. WraySupreme Court of Alabama · 1851
  5. Lee v. . LeeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Young v. . YoungSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  2. Taylor v. . TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  3. In Re Estate of JohnsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1973
  4. Richardson v. RichardsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  5. Pearce v. . PearceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945

2 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