Legal Opinion

Vandiford v. . Vandiford

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 19, 1939PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.

It is apparent from a perusal of tbe record that tbe last three issues were answered without regard to tbe pleadings, tbe evidence, tbe contentions of tbe parties, or tbe charge of tbe court. May-bap tbe jury undertook to compromise tbe case. Bartholomew v. Parrish, 186 N. C., 81, 118 S. E., 899; Gulley v. Raynor, 185 N. C., 96, 116 S. E., 171.

Tbe defendant contended from the evidence that tbe 7th issue should be answered in tbe sum of $16,348.40; while tbe plaintiff contended that it should be answered in tbe sum of $8,665.44. Tbe court instructed tbe jury to answer tbe issue accordingly as…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Jordan v. . FarthingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1895
  2. Bartholomew & Co. v. ParrishSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
  3. Daniel v. Town of BelhavenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  4. Gulley v. . RaynorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
  5. Nall v. . McMathSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State Highway Commission v. MatthisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1968
  2. Harris v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
  3. Piedmont Triad Regional Water Authority v. LambCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
  4. City of Burlington v. StaleyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985

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

Powered by the Exa API