Hutchins v. Davis
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtEeviN, J.
Nothing is better settled in law than the rule that in all cases tried by a jury the judgment must be supported by and conform to the verdict in all substantial particulars. Speight v. Anderson, 226 N.C. 492, 39 S.E. 2d 371; Supply Co. v. Horton, 220 N.C. 373, 17 S.E. 2d 493; Durham v. Davis, 171 N.C. 305, 88 S.E. 433. When the verdict of the jury in the case at bar is interpreted in the light of the pleadings, the evidence, the issues, and the charge, it is plain that it contains no finding sufficient to impose any liability upon the feme plaintiff, Cleota Hutchins, with respect to the…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- May v. . LoomisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
- Croom v. . Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
- Balcum v. . JohnsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
- Sitterson v. . SittersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
- Speight v. . AndersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Ragsdale v. KennedySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
- Croom v. . Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
- Moore v. HumphreySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1958
- Fairchild Realty Co. v. Spiegel, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- Davis v. HargettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.