Legal Opinion

Watson v. . Hilton

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 23, 1932PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAdams, J.

We do not interpret the judgment as signifying that the full amount of the recovery may be twice collected from the defendants. The words “and eacb of them” simply indicate the joint and several character of the defendants’ liability for the sum assessed as damages. But there is error in that part of the judgment which directs that upon the return of an execution unsatisfied the plaintiff may issue an execution against the person of the defendants. Construing the first and second issues in connection with the charge of the court we find that the answer to eacb of them may have been and…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hudson v. Norfolk Southern RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  2. Harris v. . SingletarySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Kendrick v. CainSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  2. Klander v. . WestSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  3. Ledford v. SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  4. Ledford v. . SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  5. Crowder v. . StiersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939

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

Powered by the Exa API