Huffman v. Ingold

Pee OueiaM.

This- ease was before us at tbe Spring Term, 1921, and is reported in 181 N. C., 426. Tbe facts, which are fully set out there, need not be repeated here. Tbe ease seems to have been tried in substantial conformity to tbe decision rendered on tbe first appeal, and tbe law appertaining to tbe new questions raised on tbe second trial. We have discovered no reversible error on tbe present appeal, and hence tbe judgment will be

Affirmed.

Adams, J., did not sit.