Harney v. Mayor

229 N.C. 71
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided May 5, 1948·Published

Opinion

Denny, J.

It does not appear on this record that the purported case on appeal was served on the appellees, or that it was settled by agreement or otherwise.

“Exceptions which point out alleged errors occurring during the progress of a trial in which oral testimony is offered can be presented only through a ‘case on appeal’ or ‘case agreed.’ Cressler v. Asheville, supra (138 N. C., 482, 51 S. E., 53).” Russos v. Bailey, 228 N. C., 783, 47 S. E. (2d), 22.

Hence, the exception to the judgment presents the only question for consideration on the appeal. The judgment is supported by the findings of fact, and must, therefore, be upheld. Wilson v. Robinson, 224 N. C., 851, 32 S. E. (2d), 601; Rader v. Coach Co., 225 N. C., 537, 35 S. E. (2d), 609; Fox v. Mills, Inc., 225 N. C., 580, 35 S. E. (2d), 869; Hughes v. Oliver, 228 N. C., 680, 47 S. E. (2d), 6; Roach v. Pritchett, 228 N. C., 747, 47 S. E. (2d), 20; Russos v. Bailey, supra; Western N. C. Conference v. Tally, ante, 1.

The judgment below is

Affirmed.

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

Harney v. Mayor, 229 N.C. 71 (N.C. 1948).

229 N.C. 71 (Harney v. Mayor) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cressler v. Asheville.
51 S.E. 53 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1905)
Rader v. Queen City Coach Co.
35 S.E.2d 609 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1945)
Fox v. Cramerton Mills, Inc.
35 S.E.2d 869 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1945)
Russos v. . Bailey
47 S.E.2d 22 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1948)
Roach v. . Pritchett
47 S.E.2d 20 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1948)
Wilson v. Robinson
32 S.E.2d 601 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1945)
Hughes v. Oliver
47 S.E.2d 6 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1948)