Norman v. Royal Crown Bottling Co.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
PHILLIPS, Judge.
The sole exception brought forward and argued in defendant’s brief is as follows:
The defendant Royal Crown Bottling Company, Inc., assigns as error:
1. The Court entering judgment in favor of the plaintiffs against the defendant Royal Crown Bottling Company, Inc., pursuant to Rule 41 of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure, which is Plaintiffs’ Exception No. 1 (No. 1) (R pp 44-50).
Despite the irrelevant reference to Rule 41, this is no more than an exception to the judgment. As such it raises only two questions of law: (1) whether the facts found support the conclusions…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Lea v. . BridgemanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
- Russell v. TaylorCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
- Moore v. Associated Brokers, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1970
- Norman v. Royal Crown Bottling Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
3Cited by1 opinion
- Seafare Corp. v. Trenor Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988