Jackson v. City of Gastonia
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.
The only question presented for decision is: Did the court below err in allowing interest from 22 October, 1952, the date of the filing of the complaint? We think so.
In tort actions for conversion, interest ordinarily is allowable in the discretion of the jury. Stephens v. Koonce, 103 N.C. 266, 9 S.E. 315; White v. Riddle, 198 N.C. 511, 152 S.E. 501; Ins. Co. v. Railroad, 198 N.C. 518, 152 S.E. 503. But this principle does not apply here for the reason that the facts were stipulated in respect to the amount of the plaintiffs’ recovery. The stipulation provides that “the reasonable value and…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Kneeland v. American Loan & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Yancey v. North Carolina State Highway & Public Works CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- In Re Chisholm's WillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
- Stephens v. . KoonceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
- Benbow v. . Robbins .Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1875
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Helms v. ReaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
- Pipkin v. Thomas & Hill, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
- State v. HazelwoodCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2007
- Phelps v. Duke Power Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
- Helms v. ReaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.