Legal Opinion

Bartholomew & Co. v. Parrish

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 19, 1923PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClaeksoN, J.

Tbe sole question in tbe case presented by tbe excep- ' tions is whether tbe verdict rendered was illegal and tbe court erred in not setting it aside.

Tbe following issue was submitted to tbe jury:

“What, if any, amount is plaintiff entitled to recover of tbe defendant for merchandise sold Spencer Parrish, upon tbe defendant’s credit for tbe year 1920?” Tbe jury answered tbe issue, after tbe word “Answer”: “Compromise $283.25.”

It is always for tbe best interest of society that those who have differences should try and amicably adjust them. When parties decide to litigate tbeir rights, they have…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State v. . BrittainSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1883
  2. Sprinkle v. Wellborn.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
  3. Rankin v. OatesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
  4. State v. . HoltSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1884
  5. Johnson v. . AllenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1888

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Sitterson v. . SittersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  2. State Highway Commission v. MatthisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1968
  3. Bundy v. . SuttonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
  4. Hamlet H.M.A., LLC v. HernandezCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2018
  5. State v. . BerrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925

5 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