Kaplan v. City of Winston-Salem
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
HIGGINS, Justice.
The Court of Appeals ordered a new trial on all issues on the assigned ground that the trial court’s instructions permitted the jury to consider the retail value of the damaged merchandise in fixing the amount of damages the plaintiffs were entitled to recover. While the court in the charge recited to the jury the respective contentions and claims of the parties respecting the amount of damages resulting from the defendant’s acts of negligence and thereafter discussed the various claims of damages, the court gave the jury this mandate:
“In the event you have reached this issue…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Carolina Power & Light Company v. PaulSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
- West Construction Co. v. Atlantic Coast Line Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. P. & F. Motor Express, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
3Cited by9 opinions
- Ocean Elec. v. Hughes LaboratoriesDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1994
- Southern Watch Supply Co. v. Regal Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
- State v. MaynardCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
- Waters v. BieseckerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- Tandy Corp. v. Boston Pet Supply, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2000
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.