Legal Opinion

Bingham v. Smith's Transfer Corp.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 2, 1982No. 8110IC320PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MORRIS, Chief Judge.

We note at the outset that plaintiffs have failed to comply with Rule 28(b)(5) of the Rules of Appellate Procedure in that references to pertinent assignments of error and exceptions are not identified by number in their brief. However, in this instance, we will suspend the requirements of Rule 28 pursuant to our residual authority expressed in Rule 2, and discuss the appeal on its merits.

Plaintiffs contend that the deputy commissioner erred in making findings of fact numbers 13, 14 and 15 and in his conclusions of law, and that the Full Commission incorrectly affirmed…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Anderson v. LINCOLN CONSTRUCTION COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  2. Hollman v. City of Raleigh, Public Utilities DepartmentSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  3. Hunt v. . StateSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  4. Harrell v. J. P. Stevens & Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  5. Jackson Ex Rel. Jackson v. North Carolina State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Jackson v. Fayetteville Area System of TransportationCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
  2. Wall Ex Rel. Wall v. North Hills Properties, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1997
  3. Smith v. Pinkerton's Security & InvestigationsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
  4. Ruffin v. Compass Group USACourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
  5. Ruffin v. Compass Group USACourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002

1 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