Legal Opinion

In Re Will of Beard

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 27, 1932PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Stacy, O. J.

The assignments of error are presumably based upon exceptions in the record, though they are neither brought forward nor specifically pointed out. Merritt v. Dick, 169 N. C., 244, 85 S. E., 2. This falls short of the requirements of Rule 19, sec. 3, of the Rules of Practice in the Supreme Court, 200 N. C., 824; Rawls v. Lupton, 193 N. C., 428, 137 S. E., 175. Only exceptive assignments of error are considered on appeal. Dixon v. Osborne, 201 N. C., 489; Sanders v. Sanders, 201 N. C., 350, 160 S. E., 289; S. v. Freeze, 170 N. C., 710, 86 S. E., 1000. The Constitution, Art. IY, sec.…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Pruitt v. WoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  2. Pruitt v. . WoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  3. Rawls v. . LuptonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
  4. Dixon v. . OsborneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  5. Cecil v. . Lumber CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. State v. . LeaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
  2. Peek v. Wachovia Bank & Trust CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  3. Barnette v. WoodySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  4. Rader v. Queen City Coach Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  5. State v. . BittingsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934

19 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