Edwards v. Hood Motor Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtJohNsON, J.
Before a verdict is complete it must be accepted by tbe court, but it is tbe duty of tbe presiding judge, before accepting a verdict, to scrutinize its form and substance to prevent insufficient or inconsistent findings from becoming a record of tbe court. Therefore, where tbe findings are indefinite or inconsistent, tbe presiding judge may give additional instructions and direct tbe jury to retire again and bring in a proper verdict, but be may not tell them what their verdict shall be. Baird v. Ball, 204 N.C. 469, 168 S.E. 667.
However, a party litigant has a substantial right in a verdict…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Butner v. SpeaseSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Butner v. . SpeaseSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Luttrell v. . Mineral Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- Allen v. . YarboroughSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
- Abernethy v. Yount.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Kindred of North Carolina, Inc. v. BondCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2003
- State v. GatlinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
- Southeastern Fire Insurance Company v. WaltonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
- Southern Nat. Bank of North Carolina v. PocockCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976
- Rogers v. Sportsworld of Rocky Mount, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.