Legal Opinion

Wilson v. Robinson

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 3, 1945PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDenny, J.

A general exception to his Honor’s findings of fact and to the signing of the judgment thereon, is insufficient to bring up for review the findings of the judge. As stated in Sturtevant v. Cotton Mills, 171 N. C., 119, 87 S. E., 992: “The alleged errors should be pointed out by specific exceptions as to findings of fact as well as law. Findings of fact by the judge are binding on us where supported by evidence, and when it is claimed that such finding is not supported by any evidence the exceptions and assignments of error should so specify. Such objection cannot be taken for the first time…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Rawls v. . LuptonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
  2. City of Hickory v. Catawba CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
  3. Vestal v. Moseley Vending MacHine Exchange, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  4. Sturtevant v. Selma Cotton MillsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
  5. Hawkins v. . Cedar WorksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. City of Goldsboro v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  2. Town of Burnsville v. BooneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  3. Mullen v. Town of LouisburgSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  4. Hughes v. OliverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  5. In Re Sams'estateSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952

13 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