1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. S.E.2d
  4. 124 S.E.2d
  5. 124 S.E.2d 877 (1962)
 

LAWING v. LANDIS

No. 310.

124 S.E.2d 877 (1962)

256 N.C. 677

Loyd L. LAWING, Administrator of the Estate of Thomas Wesley Weaver, Deceased, v. T. E. LANDIS and C. E. Landis, Trading as Landis Motors; Henry Click Truitt; P. & G. Chair Company, Inc.; Grady Carroll, Jr.; Edna Wrenn Scarlett; William Lafayette Abernethy; Houston Donnell Havnear; Abernethy's, Inc.; and Edna Wrenn Scarlett, Administratrix of the Estate of Russell Wayne Scarlett, Deceased. John E. HOUSER, Administrator of the Estate of Douglass Evon Houser, Deceased, v. T. E. LANDIS and C. E. Landis, Trading as Landis Motors; Henry Click Truitt; P. & G. Chair Company, Inc.; Grady Carroll, Jr.; Edna Wrenn Scarlett; William Lafayette Abernethy; Houston Donnell Havnear; Abernethy's, Inc.; and Edna Wrenn Scarlett, Administratrix of the Estate of Russell Wayne Scarlett, Deceased.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 11, 1962.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Richard A. Williams, Martin C. Pannell, Newton, for plaintiff Loyd A. Lawing, Administrator, appellant.

M. T. Leatherman, Don M. Pendleton, Lincolnton, for plaintiff John E. Houser, Administrator, appellant.

Patton & Ervin, Morganton, for defendant Edna Wrenn Scarlett, Individually and Edna Wrenn Scarlett, Administratrix, appellee.

Patrick, Harper & Dixon, by Charles D. Dixon and Bailey Patrick, Hickory, for defendants T. E. Landis and C. E. Landis, Trading as Landis Motors, and Henry Click Truitt, appellees.

Emmett C. Willis, James C. Smathers, Hickory, for defendants William Lafayette Abernethy, Houston Donnell Havnear, and Abernethy's, Inc., appellees.

HIGGINS, Justice.

The record, consisting of almost 300 pages, indicates the trial was carefully conducted both by the presiding judge and the participating attorneys. The judgments of nonsuit as to the Chair Company and its agent, Carroll, were entirely proper. In fact, the plaintiffs do not challenge the propriety of these judgments.

The plaintiffs do contend, however, the court committed prejudicial error by "(1) giving all the defendants the benefit of...

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