Legal Opinion

In Re Sams'estate

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 24, 1952No. 114PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.

The exceptive assignment to the findings of fact is broadside. Weaver v. Morgan, 232 N.C. 642, 61 S.E. 2d 916; Thompson v. Thompson, 235 N.C. 416, 70 S.E. 2d 495. It is insufficient to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to support the findings or any one of them. Town of Burnsville v. Boone, 231 N.C. 577, 58 S.E. 2d 351; Wilson v. Robinson, 224 N.C. 851, 32 S.E. 2d 601; McIntosh, N. C. P. & P., Sec. 517. In this state of the record, the presumption is there was sufficient evidence to support the findings. Vestal v. Vending Machine Exchange, 219 N.C. 468, 14 S.E. 2d 427.

The general…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Town of Burnsville v. BooneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  2. Vestal v. Moseley Vending MacHine Exchange, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  3. In Re Estate of Wright and Wright v. . BallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  4. In Re the Probate of the Last Will & Testament of HineSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
  5. In Re Administration on the Estate of BattleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Greene v. SpiveySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  2. In Re Estate of LowtherSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  3. Worsley v. S. &. W. Rendering Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  4. Greene v. Mitchell County Board of EducationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  5. Pruett v. PruettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API