Legal Opinion

Wiggins v. . Motor Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 1, 1924PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

The following issues were submitted to the jury, and the answers thereto:

1. Did the defendant warrant the automobile to be a new automobile of 1920 model when he sold the same to the plaintiff? Ans. Yes.

2. Was said car a new car of the 1920 model? Ans. No.

3. Is the cause of action barred by the statute of limitations? Ans. No.

4. What damages, if any, is the plaintiff entitled to recover. Ans. $1,000 without interest.

The defendant's counsel earnestly contended in the argument that the action was originally brought for rescission of the contract of the sale of a Hudson car, made by E. G. Landis…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Hoke v. . GlennSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
  2. Brewer v. . WynneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
  3. Lewis v. W. D. Rountree & Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1878
  4. McKinnon v. . McIntoshSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1887
  5. Love v. . MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. F. E. Lykes & Co. v. GroveSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931

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

Powered by the Exa API