Art Bronze & Iron Works v. Beaman

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Art Bronze & Iron Works v. Beaman, 199 N.C. 537 (N.C. 1930)
Stacy

Art Bronze & Iron Works v. Beaman

Opinion of the Court

Stacy, C. J.

Appellant’s motion for judgment non obstante veredicto', which, in effect, is but a belated motion for judgment on the pleadings, was properly overruled on authority of the decisions in Jernigan v. Neighbors, 195 N. C., 231, 141 S. E., 586, and Shives v. Cotton Mills, 151 N. C., 290, 66 S. E., 141. The defendant Gower, in his answer, denies the agreement as alleged by the Commercial Casualty Insurance Company, but this is the extent of his plea.

The record discloses no exceptive assignment of error upon which a reversal of the judgment might properly be based. Hence, it will not be disturbed.

No error.

Reference

Full Case Name
ART BRONZE AND IRON WORKS v. J. E. BEAMAN
Cited By
1 case
Status
Published