Van Gelder Yarn Co. v. Mauney
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.
We think the court’s charge on tbe issue of damages must be held for error. In tbe first place, it is peremptory or directory in character; and, secondly, it takes from tbe defendants their plea in bar, or of waiver, under subsection (a), Eule 19, of tbe Southern Cotton Tarn Association. Tbe trial court seems to bave overlooked, for tbe moment, tbe defendants’ contentions in respect of tbe amount, even if tbe issue of liability should be answered against them.
Tbe orders were given and tbe shipment made, “subject to tbe provisions of tbe Cotton Yarn Eule of 1938.” Under these, tbe merchandise…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- State v. . MerrickSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
- Spencer v. . BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
- Williams v. Eastern Carolina Coach Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
- Blake v. . SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Haywood v. Home Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
3Cited by8 opinions
- Tarkington v. Printing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
- King v. BrittSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
- Kee v. . DillinghamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
- R. R. v. . SimpkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
- Southern Box and Lumber Co. v. Home Chair Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.