Legal Opinion

McManus v. McManus

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided September 17, 1985No. 8420DC1032PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PHILLIPS, Judge.

At the threshold the inaptness and burdensome prolixity of defendant’s assignments of error requires comment. They fill *590seven record pages, 8 inches by 11 inches in size, an inordinate length for a case so limited in length and scope. Most of them do not comply with our appellate rules and are utterly superfluous, even though their purpose was to preserve every one of the myriad exceptions that were made to virtually every finding and ruling of the court, except the incidental findings concerning the marriage, separation and employments of the parties. For example, the court’s…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. White v. WhiteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
  2. Town of Burnsville v. BooneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  3. Lavene v. LaveneNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1978
  4. Loeb v. LoebCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Bustle v. RiceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994
  2. Lawing v. LawingCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
  3. Kimmel v. BrettCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988
  4. In re T.K.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
  5. Patterson v. PattersonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986

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