-
The issues submitted to the jury and their answers thereto were as follows:
"1. Are the defendants indebted to the plaintiff, as alleged in the complaint, and if so, in what sum? Answer: No.
"2. Did the plaintiff warrant the said water system to give satisfaction and furnish a sufficient supply of water for the operation of a soda fountain, as alleged in the answer? Answer: Yes.
"3. If so, did the said water system fail to furnish a sufficient supply of water for the operation of said soda fountain, as alleged? Answer: Yes.
"4. If so, what damages are the defendants entitled to recover of the plaintiff by reason thereof? Answer: Not any. Mr. E. V. Gaskins shall have hiss water plant back."
This action was here before. Gaskins v. Mitchell,
194 N.C. 275 , The proper issues were submitted to the jury in accordance with the former opinion of the action.It was a question of fact for the jury. On the whole record, if error, it was harmless and not prejudicial.
No error.
Document Info
Citation Numbers: 141 S.E. 926, 195 N.C. 851, 1928 N.C. LEXIS 223
Judges: PER CURIAM.
Filed Date: 2/29/1928
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/11/2024