Legal Opinion

Bullock v. . Williams

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 23, 1938PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Per curiam

Tbe prerequisites to tbe granting of motion for new trial for newly discovered evidence are fully set forth in Johnson v. R. R., 163 N. C., 431, 79 S. E., 690; also in Brown v. Hillsboro, 185 N. C., 368, 117 S. E., 41; Brown v. Sheets, 197 N. C., 268, 148 S. E., 233; S. v. Casey, 201 N. C., 620, 161 S. E., 81; Love v. Queen City Lines, 206 N. C., 575, 174 S. E., 514; Furniture Co. v. Cole, 207 N. C., 847, 178 S. E., 579.

An examination of tbe affidavits offered by defendant in support of tbe motion fails to show compliance with tbe tests required. When compared with tbe evidence introduced at…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Johnson v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
  2. State v. . CaseySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  3. Brown v. Town of HillsboroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
  4. Brown v. . SheetsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
  5. Brown v. . HillsboroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. McGill v. Town of LumbertonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
  2. Tindall v. American Furniture Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
  3. Hanford v. McSwainSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  4. State v. GrundlerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
  5. McCulloh v. Catawba CollegeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966

7 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