Legal Opinion

State v. . Dixon

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 25, 1923PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStact, J.

For the purpose of showing that the checks in question were made out in the name of a fictitious person, or that they were forged by the defendant, the teller of the Greensboro bank, over objection, was allowed to give the reason for their nonpayment by the Winston-Salem bank, as shown by the protest, to be “No account”— meaning that no account was carried at said bank in the name of A. C. Corbett. It was permissible for the witness to state that the checks bad been sent to the Winston-Salem bank for collection, and that they bad been protested for nonpayment and returned. In corroboration of…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. . DowdySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
  2. People v. WhitemanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  3. State v. McCormickSupreme Court of Kansas · 1896
  4. State v. . ThomasSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1870
  5. People v. LundinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Snyder v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  2. State v. MooreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1969
  3. State v. GaitenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  4. State v. KerleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  5. State v. . HartsfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924

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

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

Powered by the Exa API