Greene v. Dishman

• Decision Date: 15 June 1932
• Docket Number: No. 523.,523.
• Citation: 164 S.E. 342,262 N.C. 811
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: GREENE. v. DISHMAN et al.

164 S.E. 342

262 N.C. 811

GREENE.

v.DISHMAN et al.

No. 523.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 15, 1932.

Appeal from Superior Court, Watauga County; MacRae, Special Judge.

Action by Conley Greene, administrator, etc., against Press Dishman and another. Verdict and judgment in favor of the plaintiff, and the defendants appeal.

No error; judgment modified by consent.

Civil action to recover the value of certain personal property belonging to the estate of R. W. Guy, which, it is alleged, the defendants converted to their own use before the appointment of plaintiff as administrator of the estate of the deceased.

From a verdict and judgment in favor of the plaintiff, the defendants appeal.

Trivette & Holshouser and W. R. Lovlll, all of Boone, for appellants.

Bingham, Linney & Bingham, of Boone, for appellee.

STACY, C. J.

The record contains ten assignments of error, of which the first and second may be taken as illustrative:

"1. That the court erred in sustaining the objection of plaintiff as shown by exception No. 1, Record page 8.

"2. That his honor committed error as shown by exceptions 2 and 3, Record pages 8 and 9."

It was said in Thompson v. R. R., 147 N. C. 412, 61 S. E. 286, that a proper assignment of error to the ruling of the court on a question of evidence requires the testimony to be set out, in substance at least, so its rele-vancy can be perceived. And as to other rulings, it is essential that the attendant facts and circumstances be stated so their bearing on the controversy can be seen, to some extent, by reading the assignments themselves. See, also, Baker v. Clayton, 202 N. C. 741, 164 S. E. 233, and In re Beard's Will, 202 N. C. 661, 163 S. E. 748.

"The Court will not accept a mere colorable compliance such * * * as entering the 'first exception is the first assignment of error, ' etc. This would give no information whatever to the court, for it would necessitate turning back to the record to see what the exception was. What the court desires, and indeed the least that any appellate court requires, is that the exceptions which are bona fide be presented to the court for decision, as the points determinative of the appeal shall be stated clearly and intelligibly by the assignment of errors and not by referring to the record, and therewith shall be set out so much of the evidence or of the charge or other matter or circumstance (as the case may be) as shall be necessary to present clearly the matter to be debated." Rogers v. Jones, 172 N....