Legal Opinion

State v. . Page

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 22, 1939PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtScheNcic, J.

Tbe prosecutrix, Mary McGann, on ber direct examination and before any other witness bad testified, was allowed, over objection and exception of tbe defendant, to testify substantially tbat sbe now bad a living child born to ber after tbe death of ber husband, tbat sbe and ber husband were not divorced and were living together at tbe time of bis death, tbat sbe, tbe prosecutrix, bad a job in New Tort first as an usherette in a theatre and then in a fur factory making coats, tbat this last job was a seasonal one and expired in March, 1938, and tbat sbe got a job with a show in April following…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Rome, Watertown & Ogdensburgh RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
  2. People v. CarusoNew York Court of Appeals · 1927
  3. Hutchins v. . HutchinsNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
  4. State v. . JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
  5. Shepherd v. W. T. Mason Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1914

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. State v. CovingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  2. State v. ReevesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1994
  3. State v. SpruillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
  4. State v. BraxtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
  5. DeBruhl v. State Highway & Public Works CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956

13 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