Wolfe Ex Rel. Wolfe v. Montgomery Ward & Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Per curiam
The jury, evidently taking the Biblical view that “a good name is rather to be chosen than great riches,” have decided that the plaintiff was slandered but that he was entitled to recover no damages.
The appellant’s only complaint is that upon an affirmative finding on the first issue nominal damages, at least, should have been awarded and that he should have been adjudged entitled to recover nominal costs.
There is no other exception. The trial was free from error.
It is provided by statute (C. S,., 1241 [4]), that in actions for slander, “if the plaintiff recovers less than fifty dollars…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Chaffin v. . Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- Hutton & Bourbonnais, Inc. v. CookSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
- Davis Bros. v. WallaceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
- Cohoon v. . CooperSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
3Cited by12 opinions
- Hairston v. . Greyhound Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- Hairston v. Atlantic Greyhound Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- Britt v. Georgia-Pacific Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
- The Comm. To Elect Dan Forest v. Emps. Political Action Comm.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2018
- Armentrout v. HughesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1958
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.