Legal Opinion

Stanley v. Brown

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 31, 1964No. 742PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRodman, J.

Plaintiff’s appeal is directed to the action of the court in setting aside, because of error of law arising during the trial, that *245portion of the verdict fixing damages for personal injuries. The conclusion we reach with respect to the errors assigned by Brown makes it unnecessary to answer the question propounded by plaintiff.

Brown’s appeal presents two questions: (1) Is he liable for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff? (2) Did the court commit error in the charge with respect to the asserted negligence of Brown?

Our Workmen’s Compensation Act, c. 97 of the General Statutes, was enacted…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Universal Oil Products Co. v. Root Refining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
  2. Harris v. Diamond Construction Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1946
  3. Warner v. LederSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  4. Essick v. City of LexingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  5. Butts v. . Montague Bros.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1935

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Pruitt v. Knight Publishing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  2. Tabron v. Gold Leaf Farms, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  3. Bennett v. City of ClemsonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1987
  4. Morse v. CurtisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1973
  5. Chahdi v. MackCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2023

3 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