Legal Opinion
Stern Fish Co. v. Snowden
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided February 28, 1951No. 19PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.
The following excerpt from the charge forms the basis of one of defendant’s exceptive assignments of error and appears too wide of the mark to be sustained under any rule of interpretation or construction:
“Gentlemen of the Jury, now each one cannot be indebted to the other, to the extent of your answering both of these issues in some amount for each of these parties. If you answer the first issue, that is: Is the defendant indebted to the plaintiff as alleged in the complaint, and if so, in what amount? Why then, Gentlemen, the second issue, you’d answer that nothing, because if the defendant…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Bird v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1901
- State v. . MatthewsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1878
- State v. . FriddleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
- State v. . DunlopSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1871
- State v. SuttonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. BrittSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
- State v. CameronSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
- Dunlap v. LeeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
- State v. TerrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1994
- Williams v. RandolphCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.