Legal Opinion

Bechtel v. . Weaver

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 15, 1932PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

If it be conceded that the defendants’ plea in abatement should have been sustained (Brown v. Polk, 201 N. C., 375, 160 S. E., 357), still the correct result has been reached in another way, and the judgment will not be disturbed. Bank v. McCullers, 201 N. C., 440; Rankin v. Oates, 183 N. C., 517, 112 S. E., 32. “A new trial will not he granted when the action of the trial judge, even if erroneous, could by no possibility injure the appellant.” Butts v. Screws, 95 N. C., 215.

This disposition of the matter renders it unnecessary to consider defendants’ appeal.

Affirmed.

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Rankin v. OatesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
  2. Rankin v. . OatesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
  3. Butts v. . ScrewsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1886
  4. Farmers Bank of Clayton v. McCullersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  5. Brown v. . PolkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Goad v. Chase Home Finance, LLCCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010
  2. McPherson v. . WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  3. Hindman v. Appalachian State UniversityCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2012
  4. Munday v. Bank of FranklinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937