Legal Opinion

Reed v. . Madison County

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 2, 1938PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.

It follows from what is said in the case of Brigman v. Baley, ante, 119, that the challenge to the array should have been sustained. McIntosh, N. C. Prac. and Proc., 596. But this alone would not entitle the defendants to a venire de novo. S. v. Levy, 187 N. C., 581, 122 S. E., 386. Non constat that they may not have had a jury to their liking or that they were prejudiced thereby. Indeed, it appears from the record that no member of the original panel served on the jury in this case. It seems to have been composed of talesmen. Judgments are not to be disturbed for jury defect except upon…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Burton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
  2. Siler v. Louisville & Nashville RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
  3. Light v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
  4. Cox v. Norfolk & Carolina RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
  5. State v. . GosnellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1935

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. State v. JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  2. State v. . LuedersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  3. Martin v. ThornburgSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
  4. State v. PendletonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1994
  5. Sams v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940

8 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