Legal Opinion

Hicks v. . Nivens

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 29, 1936PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchenck, J.

The appellants group 32 assignments of error. They mention in their brief only two exceptions. Those exceptions noted in the record, but not set out in their brief, are taken as abandoned. Rule 28, Rules of Practice in the Supreme Court, 200 N. C., 811 (831).

The first exception mentioned in the appellants’ brief is the one numbered 25, and is to the court’s refusal to give a special instruction, orally requested by counsel, to the effect that if the jury “believed the evidence of the defendant, and especially the evidence of Chief Fesperman, they would find that the plaintiffs were arrested…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Garrett v. . TrotterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1871

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Myrick v. CooleyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988
  2. State v. EubanksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
  3. Mrs. Cornelius Cuthbertson Hill v. W. A. Rowland and B. S. TreadawayCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1973
  4. Kearney v. . ThomasSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  5. Clevenger v. . GroverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937

8 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