Browning v. Humphrey
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtParker, J.
The sole exception is to tbe signing of the judgment, the ruling of the court, and to “the finding of facts.” “This is a broadside exception which merely challenges the sufficiency of the facts found to support the judgment entered.” Warshaw v. Warshaw, 236 N.C. 754, 73 S.E. 2d 900.
This exception fails to point out the particular finding of fact to which exception is taken. This is not sufficient to raise the question that there is no evidence to support the findings, or any one or more of them. Vestal v. Vending Machine Co., 219 N.C. 468, 14 S.E. 2d 427.
B., p. 16, states: “Thereafter the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Wyness v. CrowleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
- Weinbach's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
- Vestal v. Moseley Vending MacHine Exchange, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
- In Re SheltonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
- Atkinson v. . DowningSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Petersen v. RogersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1994
- Dellinger v. BollingerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- Jolly v. QueenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
- Durivage v. VincentSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1960
- Matter of BotsfordCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.