Legal Opinion

Carter v. Carter

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 8, 1950No. 386PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarNHill, J.

The testimony offered at the hearing is not brought forward in the record. Therefore, it must be presumed that the findings of fact are supported by competent evidence. Hughes v. Oliver, 228 N.C. 680, 47 S.E. 2d 6; Roach v. Pritchett, 228 N.C. 747, 47 S.E. 2d 20; Radeker v. Royal Pines Park, Inc., 207 N.C. 209, 176 S.E. 285.

Upon the facts found, the one question presented for decision is this: Is the child born to plaintiff and defendant prior to their intermarriage a child of the marriage within the meaning of G-.S. 50-13? We are constrained to answer in the affirmative.

G-.S. 49-12 provides…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Hughes v. OliverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  2. Roach v. . PritchettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  3. Bowman v. HowardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
  4. Bowman v. . HowardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
  5. Radeker v. . Royal Pines Park, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1934

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. In Re Housing Authority of City of SalisburySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  2. In Re Housing Authority of City of Charlotte.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  3. Milam v. MilamArizona Supreme Court · 1966
  4. Bailey v. McPhersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  5. Goodson v. GoodsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1977

12 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