Balint v. Grayson
Citation | 256 N.C. 490,124 S.E.2d 364 |
Decision Date | 07 March 1962 |
Docket Number | No. 173,173 |
Parties | Bernard BALINT v. Elbert M. GRAYSON. Helen BALINT v. Elbert M. GRAYSON. |
Court | United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina |
Ellis, Godwin & Hooper, Jacksonville, for plaintiffs.
Joseph C. Olschner, Jacksonville, for defendant.
Defendant makes seven assignments of error. They do not conform to the rules of this Court.
The following two assignments are typical:
It will be noted that the exceptions relied upon are not grouped in the assignments of error, and the assignments do not refer to the exceptions upon which they are based.
1 Strong: N.C.Index, Appeal and Error, s. 19, p. 90.
'The function of the assignment of errors is to group and bring forward such of the exceptions previously noted as the appellant desires to preserve and present to the Court. * * *' ibid.
Where appellant's exceptions are not grouped as required by the Rules of Practice in the Supreme Court, Rules 19 (3) and 21, 254 N.C. 797, 803, they may not be considered. Ellis v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., 241 N.C. 747, 86 S.E.2d 406. The rules of practice in this Court are mandatory. Pamlico County v. Davis, 249 N.C. 648, 107 S.E.2d 306. An exception which is not assigned as error is deemed abandoned. Rose v. Bank of Wadesboro, 217 N.C. 600, 9 S.E.2d 2. An assignment of error must disclose the question sought to be presented without the necessity of going beyond the assignment itself. Lowie & Co. v. Atkins, 245 N.C. 98, 95 S.E.2d 271.
An appeal to the Supreme Court is itself an exception to the judgment or to any other matter of law appearing on the face of the record. The record, in the sense here used, refers to the essential parts of the record, such as the pleadings, verdict and judgment. Lowie & Co. v. Atkins, supra.
In the instant case the verdict supports the judgment.
No error.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Baldwin
...the appeal itself is an exception to the judgment and to any other matter of law appearing upon the face of the record. Balint v. Grayson, 256 N.C. 490, 124 S.E.2d 364; Dilday v. Board of Education, 267 N.C. 438, 148 S.E.2d 513; Cratch v. Taylor, 256 N.C. 462, 124 S.E.2d 124. The record, in......
-
State v. Little
...of practice in this Court are mandatory and will be enforced. Walter Corp. v. Gilliam, 260 N.C. 211, 132 S.E.2d 313; Balint v. Grayson, 256 N.C. 490, 124 S.E.2d 364; Pruitt v. Wood, 199 N.C. 788, 156 S.E. 126. . . Defendant's first assignment of error is ineffectual to bring up for review b......
-
Kleinfeldt v. Shoney's of Charlotte, Inc., 244
...N.C. 630, 119 S.E.2d 448; State v. Reel, 254 N.C. 778, 119 S.E.2d 876; State v. Burton, 256 N.C. 464, 124 S.E.2d 108; Balint v. Grayson, 256 N.C. 490, 124 S.E.2d 364; Jones v. Saunders, 257 N.C. 118, 125 S.E.2d 350. It will readily be perceived that the above assignment of error falls short......
-
State v. Coleman, 264
...like many of defendant's other assignments of error, does not comply with our Rules of Practice in the Supreme Court. Balint v. Grayson, 256 N.C. 490, 124 S.E.2d 364; Lowie & Co. v. Atkins, 245 N.C. 98, 95 S.E.2d 271. On our voyage of discovery it appears from the record that the excluded t......