Legal Opinion

Stanley v. Stanley

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided March 17, 1981No. 8026DC627PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MARTIN (Robert M.), Judge.

First, we note that defendant failed to set out and discuss his first and seventh assignments of error in his appellate brief, therefore, they are deemed abandoned. Rule 28(a), N.C. Rules App. Proc. In addition, defendant’s brief is utterly void of argument or authority in support of his third assignment of error, therefore, it is also deemed abandoned. “App. R. 28(a) requires that a question be presented and argued in the brief in order to obtain appellate review.” Love v. Pressley, 34 N.C. App. 503, 514, 239 S.E. 2d 574, 581 (1977), rev. denied 294 N.C. 441, 241…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Sutton v. DukeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  2. Presnell v. PellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  3. Love v. PressleyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1977
  4. Tidwell v. BookerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  5. Conrad v. ConradSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. In re the Appeal from the Environmental Management CommissionCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
  2. Warner v. LatimerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
  3. Warner v. LatimerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
  4. Buff v. CarterCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
  5. Matter of Environment. Management Com'nCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API