Legal Opinion

Jones v. Carroll

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided September 20, 1988No. 8813DC217PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HEDRICK, Chief Judge.

Defendants base their only argument on 13 assignments of error and 13 exceptions noted in the record. While the assignments of error and exceptions raise a question of the sufficiency of evidence to support the findings of fact and conclusions of law based thereon, defendants only argue in their brief that the trial court incorrectly applied the law to the set of facts in this case, and that an easement should not have been found to exist.

We have reviewed the evidence, however, and we find it is sufficient to support the findings of fact made by the trial court. As for…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Barwick v. RouseSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  2. Dorman v. Wayah Valley Ranch, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969
  3. Cooke v. WAKE ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORPORATIONSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  4. McGee v. McGeeCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1977

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Wiggins v. ShortCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1996
  2. Mecimore v. CothrenCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API