Legal Opinion

Muse v. Muse

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 26, 1951No. 92PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEbvin, J.

When no matter of law or legal inference is involved, the granting or refusing a new trial upon all or any one of the issues rests in the sound discretion of the trial judge. G.S. 1-207; Hawley v. Powell, 222 N.C. 713, 24 S.E. 2d 523; Campbell v. Laundry, 190 N.C. 649, 130 S.E. 638; Billings v. Observer, 150 N.C. 540, 64 S.E. 435; Jarrett v. Trunk Co., 144 N.C. 299, 56 S.E. 937; Benton v. Collins, 125 N.C. 83, 34 S.E. 242, 47 L.R.A. 33; McIntosh on North Carolina Practice and Procedure in Civil Cases, section 611. The record does not indicate that the judge abused his discretion in setting…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Benton v. . CollinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1899
  2. Jarrett v. High Point Trunk & Bag Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
  3. Campbell v. . LaundrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  4. Billings v. Charlotte ObserverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
  5. Campbell v. Model Steam LaundrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Poniros v. Nello L. Teer Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  2. Poniros v. Nello L. Teer Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  3. Muse v. MuseSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  4. Hunt v. CranfordSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960

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

Powered by the Exa API