Lupton v. . Express Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
There is no objection to the description of the injury as disclosed by the X-Ray plates. The exception is only to the exhibition of the plates to the jury, and as there is nothing to show any variance between the plates and the description given by the witness, we might dispose of the exception upon the ground that the ruling permitting the jury to see the plates, if erroneous, is harmless. We are, however, of opinion that it was competent to introduce the plates and to permit the jury to see them.
What was said in Frank v. Bank, 37 N.Y. Sup. Ct., 34, which is approved in Bank v. McArthur, 165…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Mauch v. City of HartfordWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
- Sias v. Consolidated Lighting Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1901
- State v. MathesonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1905
- Bruce v. BeallTennessee Supreme Court · 1897
- De Forge v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. NorrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- Hunt v. WootenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
- Bartlesville Zinc Co. v. FisherSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- National Life & Accident Ins. Co. v. RobersonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1934
- Simpson v. American Oil Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.