Basnight v. Basnight
| Decision Date | 28 September 1955 |
| Docket Number | No. 104,104 |
| Parties | Virginia Plerce BASNIGHT v. T. G. BASNIGHT, Jr. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
James & Hite, Greeville, for defendant, appellant.
James & Speight, Greenville, for plaintiff, appellee.
Two members of the Court, Winborne and Higgins, JJ., not sitting, but with Devin, Emergency Justice, participating in lieu of Winborne, J., and the Court being of the unanimous opinion that the judgment entered below is erroneous in directing that the defendant be committed to jail for an indefinite period rather than for thirty days as prescribed by statute, G.S. § 5-4, but with the six sitting members of the Court being evenly divided in opinion whether prejudicial or reversible error otherwise has been shown, the judgment below will be modified so as to limit the defendant's confinement in jail to thirty days. Subject to this modification, the judgment is affirmed in accordance with the precedents which require a majority vote to overthrow a judgment of the Superior Court. Alexander v. Auten's Auto Hire, 175 N.C. 720, 95 S.E. 850.
Modified and affirmed.
WINBORNE and HIGGINS, JJ., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cox v. Cox, 7119SC2
...the cases are unclear as to limitation on punishment in proceedings as for contempt under G.S. § 5--8. The decision in Basnight v. Basnight, 242 N.C. 645, 89 S.E.2d 259, seems to say that confinement for failure to pay alimony and support is limited by G.S. § 5--4 to thirty days. However, t......
-
Smith v. Smith
...seems clear and understandable. However confusion arises by reason of what is said in the short Per Curiam opinion in Basnight v. Basnight, 242 N.C. 645, 89 S.E. 2d 259. This was a contempt proceeding in a civil action for subsistence under G.S. § 50-16. The trial court, 'on facts found, co......
-
Smith v. Smith
...necessary supporting facts, the order must be stricken out, and the cause will be remanded for further proceedings. See Basnight v. Basnight, 242 N.C. 645, 89 S.E.2d 259. Error and ...