Karpf v. Adams
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBarNhtll, J.
There are twenty-nine exceptive assignments of error in the record. Those not brought forward and discussed in appellant’s brief are deemed to be abandoned. Eule 28, Rules of Practice in the Supreme Court, 221 N.C. 562; S. v. Avery, 236 N.C. 276; Brown v. Ward, 221 N.C. 344, 20 S.E. 2d 324; Merchant v. Lassiter, 224 N.C. 343, 30 S.E. 2d 217.
There are other assignments of error which are brought forward in the brief “in support of which no reason or argument is stated or authority cited.” To these Eule 28, supra, likewise applies.
The evidence offered by plaintiffs clearly required the…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Council v. Dickerson's, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- Perry v. Kelford Coca-Cola Bottling Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
- Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. WatsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- Riggs v. Akers Motor Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- State v. . JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- State v. BryantSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
- Peek v. Wachovia Bank & Trust CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- State v. JacksonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
- Rigsbee v. PerkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- Mason Ex Rel. Mason v. GillikinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.