Legal Opinion

Barnes v. Phoenix Utility Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 4, 1925Published

1Opinion of the CourtClaRksoN, J.

The real and material assignment of error by defendant “For that the court denied the defendants’ motion for judgment as of nonsuit at the close of plaintiffs’' evidence.” The defendant introduced no evidence.

“On a motion to nonsuit, the evidence is to be taken in the light most favorable to plaintiff, and he is entitled to the benefit of every reasonable intendment upon the evidence, and every reasonable inference to be drawn therefrom. Christman v. Hilliard, 167 N. C., 6; Oil Co. v. Hunt, 187 N. C., 157; Hanes v. Utilities Co., 188 N. C., 465; Hancock v. Southgate, 186 N. C., 282.” Lindsey…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Nash v. . RoysterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  2. Christman v. . HilliardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
  3. Whitson v. Wrenn.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
  4. Rittenhouse v. Wilmington Street-Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
  5. Standard Oil Co. v. HuntSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924

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