Legal Opinion

Broadnax v. Deloatch

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided January 9, 1974No. 736SC741PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAUGHN, Judge.

Plaintiff contends that the charge of the court was erroneous in two respects: (1) the judge restricted the jury findings to those matters specifically alleged in the complaint rather than charging on those issues arising from the evidence and (2) the judge failed to apply the law to the evidence in compliance with G.S. 1A-1, Rule 51.

Rule 51 requires that the judge “shall declare and explain the law arising on the evidence given in the case.” Plaintiff’s evidence tends to show that the defendant’s car left the road and struck his intestate’s parked car, thereby killing his…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Koutsis v. WaddelCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1971
  2. American Credit Co. of Winston-Salem, Inc. v. BrownCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1971
  3. Broadnax v. DeloatchCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1970

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Auman v. EasterCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
  2. Cantey v. BarnesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
  3. Jones v. BessCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1975

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

Powered by the Exa API