Legal Opinion

Mangum v. . Brown

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 27, 1931PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAdams, J.

The questions raised by the appeal as set forth in the appellant’s brief (Rule 2N/2) involve the competency of evidence tending to show the plaintiff’s mental condition after the execution of the release, and the adequacy of the evidence to support the jury’s answer to the second and third issues. They do not involve the fourth, fifth, and sixth issues.

In his first fourteen assignments of error the appellant contends that the questions and answers therein excepted to are not referable to the time the release was executed but only to subsequent and unrelated periods. This is not our…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Clary's Administrators v. ClarySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1841
  2. Bost v. . BostSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1882
  3. Standard Oil Co. v. HuntSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
  4. Gates v. . MaxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1899
  5. Inge v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1926

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Cox v. Jefferson-Pilot Fire & Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
  2. Walker ex rel. Walker v. WalkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  3. Hinceman v. Food LionNorth Carolina Industrial Commission · 2008
  4. Hinceman v. Food LionNorth Carolina Industrial Commission · 2009
  5. Hinceman v. LionNorth Carolina Industrial Commission · 2009

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

Powered by the Exa API