Legal Opinion

Jones v. Waldroup

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 28, 1940PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSeawell, J.

A careful scrutiny of the evidence to which plaintiff ■objected fails to disclose reversible error.

The two more serious challenges to the introduction of that evidence are directed to the testimony of E. H. Corpening and Mrs. Maude Hunter, who testified as to conversations had with Dr. Waldroup with reference to the stock now sought to be recovered from this defendant. In view of the construction which the court must give to the action of Dr. Waldroup in causing the transfer of stock in some of the several *186associations concerned and of tbe paper writing admitted by both, sides to have been…

2Cases cited36 opinions

  1. Hunt v. EureSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  2. Havens v. Bank of TarboroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
  3. Hunt v. . EureSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  4. Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. WardIllinois Supreme Court · 1928
  5. Taylor v. . SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1895

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Wells v. ClaytonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  2. Davison v. Duke UniversitySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
  3. Manning v. United States National BankOregon Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Ervin v. . Conn and Bank v. . FredericksonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  5. Buffaloe v. . BarnesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946

19 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