From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ware v. Power Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Apr 1, 1921
181 N.C. 500 (N.C. 1921)

Opinion

(Filed 13 April, 1921.)

Appeal and Error — Issues of Fact — Judgment — Technical Error.

Held, only issues of fact were involved on this appeal, and the judgment as to amount of plaintiff's damages was not the basis of his appeal, being apparently according to his own agreement, and no error is found.

APPEAL by plaintiff from Finley, J., at November Term, 1920, of ROCKINGHAM. Action to set aside a deed for a right of way over plaintiff's lands and an agreement fixing the compensation or amount of damages therefor, plaintiff alleging that his signatures to said instruments were procured by the false and fraudulent representations of defendant's agent.

J. M. Sharp, J. R. Joyce and E. B. Ware for plaintiff.

Manly, Hendren Womble and W. S. O'B. Robinson, Jr., for defendant.


Upon issues joined, the jury returned the following verdict:

"1. Was the execution of the damage agreement referred to in the pleadings procured by fraud and misrepresentation as alleged in the complaint? Answer: `No.'

"2. Was the execution of the right of way deed referred to in the pleadings procured by fraud and misrepresentation as alleged in the complaint? Answer: `No.'

"3. What damages, if any, is the plaintiff entitled to recover of the defendant? Answer: `.........'"

Defendant admitted that under the contracts it was indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of $20 and tendered judgment for this amount. His Honor gave judgment in favor of plaintiff for $20, but taxed him with the costs. Plaintiff appealed.


The controversy between the parties in this action narrowed itself on the trial to questions of fact, which the jury have answered in favor of the defendant. We have carefully examined the record and find no sufficient reason for disturbing the verdict.

Technically, under the pleadings, plaintiff may not have been entitled to judgment for the $20, but this is not the basis of his appeal. Apparently he has been rewarded according to his own agreement. His Honor below evidently took this view of the matter, and we think the plaintiff should be content with the result.

No error.


Summaries of

Ware v. Power Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Apr 1, 1921
181 N.C. 500 (N.C. 1921)
Case details for

Ware v. Power Co.

Case Details

Full title:W. P. WARE v. SOUTHERN POWER COMPANY

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Apr 1, 1921

Citations

181 N.C. 500 (N.C. 1921)
106 S.E. 669

Citing Cases

State v. Ritchie

Negligence as an element of a criminal offense cannot be defined in the same terms as that used for…