QUEEN CITY COACH COMPANY v. FULTZ

No. 243.

98 S.E.2d 860 (1957)

246 N.C. 523

QUEEN CITY COACH COMPANY v. Robert Emerson FULTZ and Mrs. Robert Emerson Fultz. Ralph C. LITTLE v. Robert Emerson FULTZ and Mrs. Robert Emerson Fultz.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 28, 1957.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Harris & Coble, Albemarle, for plaintiffs, appellants.

Carpenter & Webb, Charlotte, for defendants, appellees.


BOBBITT, Justice.

All questions posed relate to the electrical signal device on the Fultz car. Appellants contend that, "without a prior showing that such signal was `approved by Department' as required by G.S. § 20-154(b)," the evidence relating to the use thereof should have been excluded. Their assignments of error challenge (1) the competency of such evidence, (2) the charge of the court relating thereto, and (3) the court's failure to give requested instructions...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases