Legal Opinion

Douglas v. W. C. Mallison & Son

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 29, 1965No. 28PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLaice, J.

The appellant’s first three assignments of error do not comply with this Court’s Rule 19(3) in that they are not sufficient, within themselves, to present the errors relied upon. For example, Assignment #1 simply states:

“1. The ruling of his Honor on that portion of the direct examination of Paul Douglas, an objection to which was sustained. (R. p. 18). This is PLAINTIFF APPELLANT’S EXCEPTION #1.”

The rule requires that the assignment of error show what question is intended to be presented for consideration without the necessity of paging through the record to find the asserted error. A mere…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Wyatt v. North Carolina Equipment CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  2. Cowan v. Murrows Transfer, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  3. Hunt v. WootenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  4. Rodgers v. ThompsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  5. Gwyn v. Lucky City Motors, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1960

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Smith v. Fiber Controls Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  2. State v. DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  3. Raftery v. Wm. C. Vick Construction Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  4. Zopfi v. City of WilmingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  5. Hinson v. JeffersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975

15 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