Legal Opinion
State Highway Commission v. LA REYNOLDS COMPANY
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided February 2, 1968No. 439PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBobbitt, J.
Plaintiff did not except to any of the court’s findings of fact. Indeed, the judgment recites these facts were “judicially stipulated.” Plaintiff’s assignments of error are based solely on its exceptions to the court’s conclusions of law and judgment.
“An exception to a judgment raises the question whether any error of law appears on the face of the record. This includes the question whether the facts found and admitted are sufficient to support the judgment, . . .” Moore v. Owens, 255 N.C. 336, 121 S.E. 2d 540; 1 Strong, North Carolina Index 2d, Appeal and Error § 26.
Facts established by…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Yearsley v. W. A. Ross Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Gould Morris Electric Co. v. Atlantic Fire Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
- Myers v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1963
- Sale v. State Highway & Public Works CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- Midgett v. North Carolina State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Givens v. SellarsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
- Adder v. Holman & Moody, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
- Wilkie v. City of Boiling Spring LakesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2018
- Falls Sales Co. v. Board of TransportationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
- Sigmund Sternberger Foundation, Inc. v. TannenbaumSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.