Stancil v. Stancil
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtDeNNy, J.
The appellant in his case on appeal undertakes to set out six assignments of error. However, no exceptions appear anywhere in the record, not even under the purported assignments of error. Even so, in the absence of any exceptions, or when exceptions have not been preserved in accordance with the requirements of our Rules, the appeal will be taken as an exception to the judgment. Holden v. Holden, 245 N.C. 1, 95 S.E. 2d 118; Barnette v. Woody, 242 N.C. 424, 88 S.E. 2d 223. Therefore, in view of the state of the record on this appeal, we are limited to the question whether or not error appears…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Barnette v. WoodySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- City of Goldsboro v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- James v. PretlowSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- Holden v. HoldenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
- Stanley v. . StanleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Bunn v. BunnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
- Sayland Ex Rel. McLendon v. SaylandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
- Mitchell v. MitchellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
- Henderson v. HendersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- Phillips v. AlstonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.