Legal Opinion

Paul v. Neece

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 10, 1956No. 35PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWinborne, C. J.

While the record shows that defendant, the appellant, assigned as error the denial of his motion, made when plaintiff first rested his case, and renewed at the close of all the evidence, for judgment as of nonsuit, these assignments of error are not set out in appellant’s brief nor is reason or argument stated or authority cited in support thereof. Hence under Rule 28 of Rules of Practice in the Supreme Court, 221 N.C. 544, at 562, the exceptions are taken to be abandoned. Indeed, the exceptions presented are untenable.

For it is uniformly held to be the law in this State that where one person…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Avery v. StewartSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
  2. Hare v. . WeilSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  3. Cobb v. EdwardsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1895
  4. Cobb v. . EdwardsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1895
  5. Owens v. Williams.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1902

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. State v. GrundlerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
  2. Penland v. BIRD COAL COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  3. Waddell v. CarsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  4. Bryant v. KellySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  5. Tallent v. BlakeCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982

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