Legal Opinion

PETE WALL PLUMBING COMPANY v. Harris

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 23, 1966No. 689PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtParker, C.J.

Plaintiff and defendant offered evidence. “In ruling upon a motion for an involuntary judgment of nonsuit under the statute after all the evidence on both sides is in, the court may consider so much of the defendant’s testimony as is favorable to the plaintiff or tends to clarify or explain evidence offered by the plaintiff not inconsistent therewith; but it must ignore that which tends to establish another and different state of facts or which tends to contradict or impeach the testimony presented by the plaintiff.” Bundy v. Powell, 229 N.C. 707, 51 S.E. 2d 307.

Considering plaintiff’s…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. United States v. Oregon Lumber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1922
  2. Bundy v. . PowellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  3. Balint v. GraysonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  4. Economy Pumps, Inc. v. F. W. Woolworth Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  5. Lumber Co. v. . PerrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Long v. HoneycuttSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  2. Nye v. LiptonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
  3. Nye v. LiptonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  4. Stewart v. HerringCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API