John Horton v. . Elijah Green
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Civil action tried before Mitchell, J., at the last Fall Term of Caldwell Superior Court. It is considered that the syllabus and opinion convey a sufficiently correct idea of the questions raised and points decided without an attempt to condense the voluminous statement contained in the transcript.
Read the full summary
Civil action tried before Mitchell, J., at the last Fall Term of Caldwell Superior Court. It is considered that the syllabus and opinion convey a sufficiently correct idea of the questions raised and points decided without an attempt to condense the voluminous statement contained in the transcript. Suffice it to state that the second point was made by way of requests for instructions to the jury, embracing substantially the language contained in the dialogue 'in the third syllabus.* There was a verdict and judgment for the defendant and the plaintiff appealed. It is oiten said in the books…
1Opinion of the CourtBoyden, J.
In this case the plaintiff offered evidence to show that the next morning after the trade, between day-light and sun-up plaintiff’s son discovered that the mule was diseased,, and running copiously at the nose, his legs and throat swollen,, and his head drooping. The defendant called on Thomas J.-Coppy as witness, who stated that he, atjthe time of the trade and after, lived in the same town with the plaintiff, (which is quite a small village) and within fifty yards of the plaintiff'. This witness was then asked, “How long after the sale by Green to Horton of this mule, did you first hear…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Tomlinson & Co. v. MorganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- Adams v. . ReevesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1873
- McLennan v. OhmenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Wrenn v. . MorganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
- Hodges v. SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.