Tbis rule in North Carolina

1955Co., 138 N.C. 319 , 50 S.E. 703 ; Lineberry v. R.

1955Co., 138 N.C. 319 , 50 S.E. 703 ; Lineberry v. R.

1955We have said in S. v. Tola, 222 N.C. 406 , 23 S.E. 2d 321 , “a defect appearing in a warrant or bill of indictment can be taken advantage of only by motion to quash or by motion in arrest of judgment.” It would seem that tbe defendant by virtue of Rule 28, Rules of Practice in tbe Supreme Court, 221 N.C. 544 , has abandoned bis exception as to tbe insufficiency of tbe evidence to carry tbe case to tbe jury.

1955We have said in S. v. Tola, 222 N.C. 406 , 23 S.E. 2d 321 , “a defect appearing in a warrant or bill of indictment can be taken advantage of only by motion to quash or by motion in arrest of judgment.” It would seem that tbe defendant by virtue of Rule 28, Rules of Practice in tbe Supreme Court, 221 N.C. 544 , has abandoned bis exception as to tbe insufficiency of tbe evidence to carry tbe case to tbe jury.

1951Hewlett v. Schenck, 82 N.C. 234 ; Young v. Alford, 113 N.C. 130 , and cases cited; Battle v. Battle, 116 N.C. 161 ; Supply Co. v. Dowd, 146 N.C. 191 ; Piano Co. v. Loven, 207 N.C. 96 ; Bryant v. Kellum, 209 N.C. 112 ; Saieed v. Abeyounis, 217 N.C. 644 ; Anno. 36 A.L.R. 352 , 156 A.L.R. 1084 .

1951Hewlett v. Schenck, 82 N.C. 234 ; Young v. Alford, 113 N.C. 130 , and cases cited; Battle v. Battle, 116 N.C. 161 ; Supply Co. v. Dowd, 146 N.C. 191 ; Piano Co. v. Loven, 207 N.C. 96 ; Bryant v. Kellum, 209 N.C. 112 ; Saieed v. Abeyounis, 217 N.C. 644 ; Anno. 36 A.L.R. 352 , 156 A.L.R. 1084 .

1951Hewlett v. Schenck, 82 N.C. 234 ; Young v. Alford, 113 N.C. 130 , and cases cited; Battle v. Battle, 116 N.C. 161 ; Supply Co. v. Dowd, 146 N.C. 191 ; Piano Co. v. Loven, 207 N.C. 96 ; Bryant v. Kellum, 209 N.C. 112 ; Saieed v. Abeyounis, 217 N.C. 644 ; Anno. 36 A.L.R. 352 , 156 A.L.R. 1084 .

1951Hewlett v. Schenck, 82 N.C. 234 ; Young v. Alford, 113 N.C. 130 , and cases cited; Battle v. Battle, 116 N.C. 161 ; Supply Co. v. Dowd, 146 N.C. 191 ; Piano Co. v. Loven, 207 N.C. 96 ; Bryant v. Kellum, 209 N.C. 112 ; Saieed v. Abeyounis, 217 N.C. 644 ; Anno. 36 A.L.R. 352 , 156 A.L.R. 1084 .

1951Hewlett v. Schenck, 82 N.C. 234 ; Young v. Alford, 113 N.C. 130 , and cases cited; Battle v. Battle, 116 N.C. 161 ; Supply Co. v. Dowd, 146 N.C. 191 ; Piano Co. v. Loven, 207 N.C. 96 ; Bryant v. Kellum, 209 N.C. 112 ; Saieed v. Abeyounis, 217 N.C. 644 ; Anno. 36 A.L.R. 352 , 156 A.L.R. 1084 .

1951Hewlett v. Schenck, 82 N.C. 234 ; Young v. Alford, 113 N.C. 130 , and cases cited; Battle v. Battle, 116 N.C. 161 ; Supply Co. v. Dowd, 146 N.C. 191 ; Piano Co. v. Loven, 207 N.C. 96 ; Bryant v. Kellum, 209 N.C. 112 ; Saieed v. Abeyounis, 217 N.C. 644 ; Anno. 36 A.L.R. 352 , 156 A.L.R. 1084 .

1951Hewlett v. Schenck, 82 N.C. 234 ; Young v. Alford, 113 N.C. 130 , and cases cited; Battle v. Battle, 116 N.C. 161 ; Supply Co. v. Dowd, 146 N.C. 191 ; Piano Co. v. Loven, 207 N.C. 96 ; Bryant v. Kellum, 209 N.C. 112 ; Saieed v. Abeyounis, 217 N.C. 644 ; Anno. 36 A.L.R. 352 , 156 A.L.R. 1084 .

1946S . v. Lewis, 224 N. C., 774 , 32 S. E. (2d), 334 , and cases there cited.

1946S . v. Lewis, 224 N. C., 774 , 32 S. E. (2d), 334 , and cases there cited.

1944Tbe recital is conclusive as against collateral attack when and only when it is consistent with tbe record in tbe case, as when tbe record shows service when in fact no service has been bad, Dunn v. Wilson, *70 210 N. C., 493 . 187 S. E., 802 ; Monroe v. Niven, 221 N. C., 362 , 20 S. E. (2d), 311 ; Downing v. White, supra; Stocks v. Stocks, 179 N. C., 285 , 102 S. E., 306 ; Estes v. Rash, 170 N. C., 341 , 87 S. E., 109 ; Thompson v. Notion Co., 160 N. C., 520 , 76 S. E., 470 ; Harrison v. Hargrove, supra, or tbe summons has been lost, Pinnell v. Burroughs, supra; McDonald v. Hoffman, supra. “A

1944Tbe recital is conclusive as against collateral attack when and only when it is consistent with tbe record in tbe case, as when tbe record shows service when in fact no service has been bad, Dunn v. Wilson, *70 210 N. C., 493 . 187 S. E., 802 ; Monroe v. Niven, 221 N. C., 362 , 20 S. E. (2d), 311 ; Downing v. White, supra; Stocks v. Stocks, 179 N. C., 285 , 102 S. E., 306 ; Estes v. Rash, 170 N. C., 341 , 87 S. E., 109 ; Thompson v. Notion Co., 160 N. C., 520 , 76 S. E., 470 ; Harrison v. Hargrove, supra, or tbe summons has been lost, Pinnell v. Burroughs, supra; McDonald v. Hoffman, supra. “A

1944Tbe recital is conclusive as against collateral attack when and only when it is consistent with tbe record in tbe case, as when tbe record shows service when in fact no service has been bad, Dunn v. Wilson, *70 210 N. C., 493 . 187 S. E., 802 ; Monroe v. Niven, 221 N. C., 362 , 20 S. E. (2d), 311 ; Downing v. White, supra; Stocks v. Stocks, 179 N. C., 285 , 102 S. E., 306 ; Estes v. Rash, 170 N. C., 341 , 87 S. E., 109 ; Thompson v. Notion Co., 160 N. C., 520 , 76 S. E., 470 ; Harrison v. Hargrove, supra, or tbe summons has been lost, Pinnell v. Burroughs, supra; McDonald v. Hoffman, supra. “A

1944Tbe recital is conclusive as against collateral attack when and only when it is consistent with tbe record in tbe case, as when tbe record shows service when in fact no service has been bad, Dunn v. Wilson, *70 210 N. C., 493 . 187 S. E., 802 ; Monroe v. Niven, 221 N. C., 362 , 20 S. E. (2d), 311 ; Downing v. White, supra; Stocks v. Stocks, 179 N. C., 285 , 102 S. E., 306 ; Estes v. Rash, 170 N. C., 341 , 87 S. E., 109 ; Thompson v. Notion Co., 160 N. C., 520 , 76 S. E., 470 ; Harrison v. Hargrove, supra, or tbe summons has been lost, Pinnell v. Burroughs, supra; McDonald v. Hoffman, supra. “A

1944Tbe recital is conclusive as against collateral attack when and only when it is consistent with tbe record in tbe case, as when tbe record shows service when in fact no service has been bad, Dunn v. Wilson, *70 210 N. C., 493 . 187 S. E., 802 ; Monroe v. Niven, 221 N. C., 362 , 20 S. E. (2d), 311 ; Downing v. White, supra; Stocks v. Stocks, 179 N. C., 285 , 102 S. E., 306 ; Estes v. Rash, 170 N. C., 341 , 87 S. E., 109 ; Thompson v. Notion Co., 160 N. C., 520 , 76 S. E., 470 ; Harrison v. Hargrove, supra, or tbe summons has been lost, Pinnell v. Burroughs, supra; McDonald v. Hoffman, supra. “A

1944Tbe recital is conclusive as against collateral attack when and only when it is consistent with tbe record in tbe case, as when tbe record shows service when in fact no service has been bad, Dunn v. Wilson, *70 210 N. C., 493 . 187 S. E., 802 ; Monroe v. Niven, 221 N. C., 362 , 20 S. E. (2d), 311 ; Downing v. White, supra; Stocks v. Stocks, 179 N. C., 285 , 102 S. E., 306 ; Estes v. Rash, 170 N. C., 341 , 87 S. E., 109 ; Thompson v. Notion Co., 160 N. C., 520 , 76 S. E., 470 ; Harrison v. Hargrove, supra, or tbe summons has been lost, Pinnell v. Burroughs, supra; McDonald v. Hoffman, supra. “A

1944Tbe recital is conclusive as against collateral attack when and only when it is consistent with tbe record in tbe case, as when tbe record shows service when in fact no service has been bad, Dunn v. Wilson, *70 210 N. C., 493 . 187 S. E., 802 ; Monroe v. Niven, 221 N. C., 362 , 20 S. E. (2d), 311 ; Downing v. White, supra; Stocks v. Stocks, 179 N. C., 285 , 102 S. E., 306 ; Estes v. Rash, 170 N. C., 341 , 87 S. E., 109 ; Thompson v. Notion Co., 160 N. C., 520 , 76 S. E., 470 ; Harrison v. Hargrove, supra, or tbe summons has been lost, Pinnell v. Burroughs, supra; McDonald v. Hoffman, supra. “A

1944Tbe recital is conclusive as against collateral attack when and only when it is consistent with tbe record in tbe case, as when tbe record shows service when in fact no service has been bad, Dunn v. Wilson, *70 210 N. C., 493 . 187 S. E., 802 ; Monroe v. Niven, 221 N. C., 362 , 20 S. E. (2d), 311 ; Downing v. White, supra; Stocks v. Stocks, 179 N. C., 285 , 102 S. E., 306 ; Estes v. Rash, 170 N. C., 341 , 87 S. E., 109 ; Thompson v. Notion Co., 160 N. C., 520 , 76 S. E., 470 ; Harrison v. Hargrove, supra, or tbe summons has been lost, Pinnell v. Burroughs, supra; McDonald v. Hoffman, supra. “A

1944Tbe recital is conclusive as against collateral attack when and only when it is consistent with tbe record in tbe case, as when tbe record shows service when in fact no service has been bad, Dunn v. Wilson, *70 210 N. C., 493 . 187 S. E., 802 ; Monroe v. Niven, 221 N. C., 362 , 20 S. E. (2d), 311 ; Downing v. White, supra; Stocks v. Stocks, 179 N. C., 285 , 102 S. E., 306 ; Estes v. Rash, 170 N. C., 341 , 87 S. E., 109 ; Thompson v. Notion Co., 160 N. C., 520 , 76 S. E., 470 ; Harrison v. Hargrove, supra, or tbe summons has been lost, Pinnell v. Burroughs, supra; McDonald v. Hoffman, supra. “A

1944Tbe recital is conclusive as against collateral attack when and only when it is consistent with tbe record in tbe case, as when tbe record shows service when in fact no service has been bad, Dunn v. Wilson, *70 210 N. C., 493 . 187 S. E., 802 ; Monroe v. Niven, 221 N. C., 362 , 20 S. E. (2d), 311 ; Downing v. White, supra; Stocks v. Stocks, 179 N. C., 285 , 102 S. E., 306 ; Estes v. Rash, 170 N. C., 341 , 87 S. E., 109 ; Thompson v. Notion Co., 160 N. C., 520 , 76 S. E., 470 ; Harrison v. Hargrove, supra, or tbe summons has been lost, Pinnell v. Burroughs, supra; McDonald v. Hoffman, supra. “A

1944Tbe recital is conclusive as against collateral attack when and only when it is consistent with tbe record in tbe case, as when tbe record shows service when in fact no service has been bad, Dunn v. Wilson, *70 210 N. C., 493 . 187 S. E., 802 ; Monroe v. Niven, 221 N. C., 362 , 20 S. E. (2d), 311 ; Downing v. White, supra; Stocks v. Stocks, 179 N. C., 285 , 102 S. E., 306 ; Estes v. Rash, 170 N. C., 341 , 87 S. E., 109 ; Thompson v. Notion Co., 160 N. C., 520 , 76 S. E., 470 ; Harrison v. Hargrove, supra, or tbe summons has been lost, Pinnell v. Burroughs, supra; McDonald v. Hoffman, supra. “A

1944Tbe recital is conclusive as against collateral attack when and only when it is consistent with tbe record in tbe case, as when tbe record shows service when in fact no service has been bad, Dunn v. Wilson, *70 210 N. C., 493 . 187 S. E., 802 ; Monroe v. Niven, 221 N. C., 362 , 20 S. E. (2d), 311 ; Downing v. White, supra; Stocks v. Stocks, 179 N. C., 285 , 102 S. E., 306 ; Estes v. Rash, 170 N. C., 341 , 87 S. E., 109 ; Thompson v. Notion Co., 160 N. C., 520 , 76 S. E., 470 ; Harrison v. Hargrove, supra, or tbe summons has been lost, Pinnell v. Burroughs, supra; McDonald v. Hoffman, supra. “A

1939Jur., 157 , where it is said: “Tbe usual practice in tbe enforcement of a bond to dissolve an attachment or garnishment or to release attached or garnished property is by an action on such bond.” Tbe cases of Thompson v. Dillingham, 183 N. C., 566 , 112 S. E., 321 , and Martin v. McBryde, 182 N. C., 175 , 108 S. E., 739 , cited by plaintiff, may not be held controlling under tbe facts of tbis ease.

1939Jur., 157 , where it is said: “Tbe usual practice in tbe enforcement of a bond to dissolve an attachment or garnishment or to release attached or garnished property is by an action on such bond.” Tbe cases of Thompson v. Dillingham, 183 N. C., 566 , 112 S. E., 321 , and Martin v. McBryde, 182 N. C., 175 , 108 S. E., 739 , cited by plaintiff, may not be held controlling under tbe facts of tbis ease.

1939Jur., 157 , where it is said: “Tbe usual practice in tbe enforcement of a bond to dissolve an attachment or garnishment or to release attached or garnished property is by an action on such bond.” Tbe cases of Thompson v. Dillingham, 183 N. C., 566 , 112 S. E., 321 , and Martin v. McBryde, 182 N. C., 175 , 108 S. E., 739 , cited by plaintiff, may not be held controlling under tbe facts of tbis ease.

1939Jur., 157 , where it is said: “Tbe usual practice in tbe enforcement of a bond to dissolve an attachment or garnishment or to release attached or garnished property is by an action on such bond.” Tbe cases of Thompson v. Dillingham, 183 N. C., 566 , 112 S. E., 321 , and Martin v. McBryde, 182 N. C., 175 , 108 S. E., 739 , cited by plaintiff, may not be held controlling under tbe facts of tbis ease.

1938Tbe second assignment of error assails tbat portion of tbe charge which reads: “If a man is under tbe influence of intoxicating liquor be has got enough to make him think or act or do differently from what be would think or act if be did not have it, whether it is a spoonful or a quart, whether it is a bottle of beer or a quart of liquor.” Tbis instruction is in substantial accord with tbe definition of “under tbe influence of an intoxicant” approved in S. v. Dills, 204 N. C., 33 , and cannot be held for reversible error.

1937Tbis rule is well settled and founded in reason, justice and sound policy.” Tbe dealings where trust relationship exists is fully gone into in Hinton v. West, 207 N. C., 708 ; Harrelson v. Cox, 207 N. C., 651 .

1937Tbis rule is well settled and founded in reason, justice and sound policy.” Tbe dealings where trust relationship exists is fully gone into in Hinton v. West, 207 N. C., 708 ; Harrelson v. Cox, 207 N. C., 651 .

1931Plaintiff relies upon tbe case of Fountain v. Pitt, 171 N. C., 113 .

1929The rule is stated by Brogden, J., in S. v. Nance, 195 N. C., 47 , 141 S. E., 468 , as follows: “If a defendant testified in bis own behalf, but offers no evidence as to bis character, the State may offer evidence of bis bad character, but such evidence should affect only bis credibility as a witness.” In S. v. Colson, 193 N. C., 236 , 136 S. E., 730 , it is said by Stacy, C.

1929The rule is stated by Brogden, J., in S. v. Nance, 195 N. C., 47 , 141 S. E., 468 , as follows: “If a defendant testified in bis own behalf, but offers no evidence as to bis character, the State may offer evidence of bis bad character, but such evidence should affect only bis credibility as a witness.” In S. v. Colson, 193 N. C., 236 , 136 S. E., 730 , it is said by Stacy, C.

1929The rule is stated by Brogden, J., in S. v. Nance, 195 N. C., 47 , 141 S. E., 468 , as follows: “If a defendant testified in bis own behalf, but offers no evidence as to bis character, the State may offer evidence of bis bad character, but such evidence should affect only bis credibility as a witness.” In S. v. Colson, 193 N. C., 236 , 136 S. E., 730 , it is said by Stacy, C.

1929The rule is stated by Brogden, J., in S. v. Nance, 195 N. C., 47 , 141 S. E., 468 , as follows: “If a defendant testified in bis own behalf, but offers no evidence as to bis character, the State may offer evidence of bis bad character, but such evidence should affect only bis credibility as a witness.” In S. v. Colson, 193 N. C., 236 , 136 S. E., 730 , it is said by Stacy, C.

1927S. v. Bullard, 100 N. C., 487 ; Marcom v. Adams, 122 N. C., 222 ; Coxe v. Singleton, 139 N. C., 362 ; S. v. Murdock, 183 N. C., 779 ; S. v. Colson, ante, 236; S. v. Canup, 180 N. C., 739 .

1927S. v. Bullard, 100 N. C., 487 ; Marcom v. Adams, 122 N. C., 222 ; Coxe v. Singleton, 139 N. C., 362 ; S. v. Murdock, 183 N. C., 779 ; S. v. Colson, ante, 236; S. v. Canup, 180 N. C., 739 .

1927In S. v. Holly, 155 N. C., 485 , tbe Court bas held tbat a defendant charged with crime may offer evidence of bis good character, and thereupon tbe State may offer evidence of bis bad character, “but cannot, by cross-examination or otherwise, offer evidence as to particular acts of misconduct.” Tbis rule is both sound and salutary, for tbe reason tbat it obviates a mass of collateral questions which would interminably prolong trials and inevitably result in drawing tbe minds of tbe jurors far afield from tbe merit of tbe case.