History
  • No items yet
midpage
Blackburn v. . Fair
109 N.C. 465
N.C.
1891
Check Treatment

There was no exception to evidence received or to that excluded on the trial in this case. Nor were there any objections to the instructions the court gave the jury. After verdict, on the motion for a new trial, the defendant, in support of his motion, contended that it should have given the jury certain instructions his counsel for the first time then suggested. The motion was denied.

The court having given the jury appropriate instructions, as it appears it did, without objection, if the defendant desired that it should give fuller or special instructions, he should have stated the same in apt time. It was too late after verdict to complain that instructions that the court might have given were not given. Davis v. Council, 92 N.C. 725; Brantonv. O'Briant, 93 N.C. 99; S. v. Debnam, 98 N.C. 712; S. v. Bailey,100 N.C. 528.

Affirmed.

Cited: Craddock v. Barnes, 142 N.C. 99. *Page 338

(466)

Case Details

Case Name: Blackburn v. . Fair
Court Name: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Date Published: Sep 5, 1891
Citation: 109 N.C. 465
Court Abbreviation: N.C.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.