Legal Opinion

Gold v. . Kiker

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 25, 1940PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.

(after stating the facts as above) : Two serious questions are posed by the record:

First. Was it error to refuse the defendant’s motion for a mistrial? The answer to this question is not altogether free from difficulty, albeit the reasons assigned by the defendant for its request were perhaps untenable. Was not the real reason for ordering a dismissal of the action as against Kiker & Yount the probable harm that might otherwise come to Ames & Webb, Inc.? And if it were hurtful for them to remain in the case, notwithstanding their agreement to do so, had not the harm already been done? S. v.…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Lincoln v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
  2. Brewer v. RingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
  3. West Construction Co. v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
  4. Cole v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  5. In Re Will of RossSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Brewer v. . Ring and ValkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
  2. McNinch v. . Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
  3. Beaman v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  4. Carolina Scenic Stages v. LowtherSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  5. Eller v. A. C. Lawrence Leather Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1942

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