Hyde County Board of Education v. Mann
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtDenny, J.
The respondents’ first three exceptions brought forward as assignments of error Nos. 1, 2 andi 3, relate to the court having sustained the objections of the petitioner to certain questions propounded by the respondents’ attorneys to the respondents. These exceptions are without merit for the reason that the respondents failed to insert in the record what the response of the respective respondents would have been had they been permitted to answer. Highway Comm. v. Privett, 246 N.C. 501, 99 S.E. 2d 61; Hatcher v. Clayton, 242 N.C. 450, 88 S.E. 2d 104; Peek v. Trust Co., 242 N.C. 1, 86 S.E. 2d…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Peek v. Wachovia Bank & Trust CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- State v. PoolosSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- Hatcher v. ClaytonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- North Carolina State Highway & Public Works Commission v. PrivettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- Ralls v. ParrishTexas Supreme Court · 1912
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- North Carolina Board of Architecture v. LeeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
- Hanna v. BradyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
- Friends of Hatteras Island National Historic Maritime Forest Land Trust for Preservation, Inc. v. Coastal Resources CommissionCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1995
- State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
- Abbitt v. BartlettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.