In Re Collins

38 S.E.2d 160, 226 N.C. 412, 1946 N.C. LEXIS 477
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMay 22, 1946
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 38 S.E.2d 160 (In Re Collins) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Collins, 38 S.E.2d 160, 226 N.C. 412, 1946 N.C. LEXIS 477 (N.C. 1946).

Opinion

Schenck, J.

The one exception to the judgment presents but the single question, whether the facts found and admitted are sufficient to support the judgment. Shuford v. Building & Loan Asso., 210 N. C., 237, 186 S. E., 352; Wilson v. Charlotte, 206 N. C., 856, 175 S. E., 926.

It is insufficient to bring up for review the findings of fact or the evidence upon which such facts are based. When the only assignment of error is based on appellant’s exception to the judgment and the judgment is supported by the findings of fact, the judgment will be affirmed. Rader v. Coach Co., 225 N. C., 537, 35 S. E. (2d), 609. An exception to the judgment affirming the judgment below is insufficient to bring up for review the findings of fact, or the competency and sufficiency of the evidence to support the findings and conclusions of law. Fox v. Mills, Inc., 225 N. C., 580, 35 S. E. (2d), 869. An exception to the judgment presents the single question whether the facts found and admitted are sufficient to support the judgment rendered. Lee v. Board of Adjustment, ante, 107. The findings of fact by the judge below are binding on the Supreme Court where supported by evidence, and where it is claimed that such findings are not supported by any evidence the exceptions and assignments of error must so specify, otherwise the question is not presented for decision of the Supreme Court. Wilson v. Robinson, 224 N. C., 851, 32 S. E. (2d), 601. There are in the record no exceptions taken by the appellant pointing out any specific error. The judgment is based on the findings by his Honor below and are presumed, in the *414 absence of specific exceptions, to be supported by the evidence and are binding upon this Court. Wilson v. Robinson, supra; and since an exception to the signing of the judgment presents only the face of the record for inspection and review, and when the judgment is supported by the record the exception must fail. King v. Rudd, ante, 156. We have examined it in the instant case and are of the opinion, and so hold, that the findings of fact in the record support the judgment.

For the reasons stated, the judgment below is

Affirmed.

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

Related

Henderson County v. Johnson
55 S.E.2d 502 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1949)
Roach v. . Pritchett
47 S.E.2d 20 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1948)
Smith v. Smith
226 N.C. 506 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1946)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
38 S.E.2d 160, 226 N.C. 412, 1946 N.C. LEXIS 477, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-collins-nc-1946.