Legal Opinion

Cummings v. Queen City Coach Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 10, 1941PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtScheNOk, J.

¥e tbinb, and so bold, tbat tbe demurrer to tbe evidence, C. S., 567, was properly overruled.

Tbe court charged tbe jury tbat “tbe plaintiff further offered evidence which tends to show . . . tbat as a result of such injuries she was forced to go to tbe hospital in Wadesboro and stay there approximately twenty-four hours and then stayed in tbe Hamlet hospital for seven days and tbat she has received a bill for doctors and medical services in the sum of $118.00 for treatment of her injuries.” And later tbe court in its charge said: “Tbe plaintiff insists and contends . . . tbat she has been…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. . WyontSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  2. State v. . LoveSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
  3. Smith v. Stanfield Hosiery Mill, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  4. Howell v. . HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Star Manufacturing Co. v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  2. Darden v. LeemasterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  3. Dove v. CainSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  4. Kuyrkendall v. Clark's Discount Department StoreCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969

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

Powered by the Exa API