Legal Opinion

Tindal v. Mills

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 24, 1965Published

1Opinion of the Court

PeR Cueiam.

Defendant makes twenty-one assignments of error and brings forward and discusses eleven of these in his brief. It is noted that none of the assignments relied on, except that relating to nonsuit, complies with Rules 19(3) and 21 of the rules of practice in the Supreme Court. 254 N.C. 797, 803. See Brown v. Brown, 264 N.C. 485, 141 S.E. 2d 875. However, we have carefully examined and considered each of them.

Defendant seems to stress, somewhat more than his others, the contention that the court erred in admitting, over his objection, testimony by plaintiff and one of plaintiff’s…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Brown v. BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  2. Tapp v. Dibrell.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904

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

Powered by the Exa API