Dillingham v. Blue Ridge Motors, Inc.

66 S.E.2d 641, 234 N.C. 171, 1951 N.C. LEXIS 409
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided September 19, 1951·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

JOHNSON, J.

The plaintiff merely excepted to the judgment below and assigned as error the court’s “findings of fact and conclusions of law as set out in said judgment.” This assignment of error is broadside. The exception and assignment bring up only the question whether the facts found support the judgment. Bailey v. McPherson, 233 N.C. 231, 63 S.E. 2d 559; Burnsville v. Boone, 231 N.C. 577, 58 S.E. 2d 351. The Judge below found as facts that the plaintiff failed to establish either (1) mistake, surprise, inadvertence, or excusable neglect, or (2) that he has a meritorious defense to the counterclaim within the purview of G.S. 1-220. These findings support the judgment. No error appears on the face of the record. Therefore, the judgment below is

Affirmed.

Valentine, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Dillingham v. Blue Ridge Motors, Inc., 66 S.E.2d 641, 234 N.C. 171, 1951 N.C. LEXIS 409 (N.C. 1951).

66 S.E.2d 641 (Dillingham v. Blue Ridge Motors, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Holcombe v. Bowman
175 S.E.2d 362 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1970)