R. E. Uptegraff Manufacturing Co. v. International Union of Electrical Radio & Machine Workers
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
BALEY, Judge.
Defendants have excepted to all of Judge Maddrey’s orders, and assert that all of them are invalid. They attack the consent order of March 15 on two grounds. First, they contend that it was not in fact based on the consent of the parties; and second, they argue that it violated Rule 65(d) of the Rules of Civil Procedure.
Clearly a consent order cannot be valid unless the parties actually consent to it. “The power of the court to sign a consent judgment depends upon the unqualified consent of the parties *548thereto; and the judgment is void if such consent does not exist at the time…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Collins v. North Carolina State Highway & Public Works CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
- Moore v. HumphreySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1958
- King v. . KingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
- Overton v. OvertonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
- Stanley v. CoxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Daniels v. Montgomery Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
- State v. SamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
- Few v. Hammack Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
- Schultz and Assoc. v. IngramCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
- Stewart v. Southeastern Regional Medical CenterCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.