Howland v. Stitzer

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Howland v. Stitzer

89 S.E.2d 149, 242 N.C. 611, 1955 N.C. LEXIS 631

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Howland v. Stitzer. Read the opinion of the Court — 240 N.C. 689 →

Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided September 21, 1955·Published

Opinion

Pee Cueiam.

The judgment entered in the court below is in accord with the opinion of this Court handed down at the Fall Term, 1954, referred to above. Furthermore, we find nothing in the judgment entered which is in conflict with the terms of the separation agreement involved, and which we have heretofore held to be a valid and enforceable contract between the parties thereto.

The judgment of the court below, in all respects, is

Affirmed.

WiNBOENE and Higgins, JJ., 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

Pee Cueiam.

The judgment entered in the court below is in accord with the opinion of this Court handed down at the Fall Term, 1954, referred to above. Furthermore, we find nothing in the judgment entered which is in conflict with the terms of the separation agreement involved, and which we have heretofore held to be a valid and enforceable contract between the parties thereto.

The judgment of the court below, in all respects, is

Affirmed.

WiNBOENE and Higgins, JJ., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Howland v. Stitzer, 89 S.E.2d 149, 242 N.C. 611, 1955 N.C. LEXIS 631 (N.C. 1955).

Pincite

89 S.E.2d 149 (Howland v. Stitzer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.