Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • Mr. R.Y. Kibler, for appellant, cites: Code of Procedure of 1912, sec. 225; 27 L.R.A. (N.S.) 858; 106 N.C. 297; 71 S.E. 257; 101 N.C. 103; 7 S.E. 661; 28 Wend. 152; 107 S.C. ___; 93 S.E. 243. Mr. C.M. Efird, for respondent, cites: 51 S.C. 405; 64 S.C. 343; 46 Fed. Rep. 569.
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Click here to upload
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • Mr. R.Y. Kibler, for appellant, cites: Code of Procedure of 1912, sec. 225; 27 L.R.A. (N.S.) 858; 106 N.C. 297; 71 S.E. 257; 101 N.C. 103; 7 S.E. 661; 28 Wend. 152; 107 S.C. ___; 93 S.E. 243. Mr. C.M. Efird, for respondent, cites: 51 S.C. 405; 64 S.C. 343; 46 Fed. Rep. 569.
See more information ...
Smart Summary

SHARP v. HUGGINS.

June 27, 1918. The opinion of the Court was delivered by

MR. JUSTICE WATTS.

This is an appeal from an order of Judge Rice refusing to set aside a judgment and to grant a new trial. The exceptions are overruled under the authority of Gales v. Poe, 107 S.C. 483, 93 S.E. 180, and appeal dismissed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.
Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

Comments

SHARP v. HUGGINS
(Jun 27, 1918)