Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1932

Bechtel v. . Weaver

Bechtel v. . Weaver
Supreme Court of North Carolina · Decided June 15, 1932 · PER CURIAM.
164 S.E. 338; 202 N.C. 856; 1932 N.C. LEXIS 286 (South Eastern Reporter)

Bechtel v. . Weaver

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

If it be conceded that the defendants’ plea in abatement should have been sustained (Brown v. Polk, 201 N. C., 375, 160 S. E., 357), still the correct result has been reached in another way, and the judgment will not be disturbed. Bank v. McCullers, 201 N. C., 440; Rankin v. Oates, 183 N. C., 517, 112 S. E., 32. “A new trial will not he granted when the action of the trial judge, even if erroneous, could by no possibility injure the appellant.” Butts v. Screws, 95 N. C., 215.

This disposition of the matter renders it unnecessary to consider defendants’ appeal.

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.