Maxwell v. Proctor & Gamble Distributing Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
OlakksoN, <T.
The defendant introduced no evidence and at the close of plaintiffs’ evidence made a motion for judgment as in case of nonsuit. C. S., 567. The court overruled the motion and in this we can see no error.
The defendant contends that “The termination of this motion must depend upon the competency of plaintiffs’ evidence to establish (a) contract; and (b) its breach.” Defendant also contends: “That there was no competent evidence offered of the contract. The whole evidence offered by the plaintiffs is to the acts and declarations of the alleged agent, without proof aliunde of agency.”
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Waggoner v. Western Carolina Publishing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
- In Re the Will of BealeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
- Starkweather v. . GravelySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
- National Exchange Bank of Chester v. SklutSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
- Lawson v. Bank of BladenboroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Snyder v. FreemanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
- Powell v. . Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
- Pipkin v. Thomas & Hill, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1977
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1994
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1994