Legal Opinion

In re Crouse

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided December 20, 1983No. 8321DC207PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

WEBB, Judge.

In his first assignment of error the respondent contends that the commitment order is void on its face because the court did not record facts to support the order as required by G.S. 122-58.7. He says this is so because the court recorded the facts by placing the letter “x” in the boxes on the commitment order form beside *698the facts and other findings it made. He says this violates the rule of In re Jacobs, 38 N.C. App. 573, 248 S.E. 2d 448 (1978). It is true that case states that “Merely placing an ‘X’ in the boxes on the commitment order form does not comply with the statute.” We…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. In Matter of KoyiCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1977
  2. Matter of JacobsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
  3. Matter of CrainshawCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. In re R.R.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2018

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API