Home/Court of Appeals of North Carolina/In re Hennie

In re Hennie

207 S.E.2d 367, 22 N.C. App. 690, 1974 N.C. App. LEXIS 2420
CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina
DecidedAugust 7, 1974
DocketNo. 7421DC398
StatusPublished

This text of 207 S.E.2d 367 (In re Hennie) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals 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 Hennie, 207 S.E.2d 367, 22 N.C. App. 690, 1974 N.C. App. LEXIS 2420 (N.C. Ct. App. 1974).

Opinion

CARSON, Judge.

No objections or exceptions were entered by the respondent during the hearing. The purported assignments of error are not proper and ought not be considered by this court. Rules 19 and 28, Rules of Practice in the Court of Appeals of North Carolina. The exception to the signing of the judgment is the only exception properly presented. Moore v. Brokers, Inc., 9 N.C. App. 436, 176 S.E. 2d 355 (1970) ; Highway Comm. v. Rankin, 2 N.C. App. 452, 163 S.E. 2d 302 (1968). It appears from an examination of the record that there was an abundance of facts to support the order of the court.

No error.

Judges Britt and Hedrick concur.

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

Related

North Carolina State Highway Commission v. Rankin
163 S.E.2d 302 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1968)
Moore v. Associated Brokers, Inc.
176 S.E.2d 355 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1970)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
207 S.E.2d 367, 22 N.C. App. 690, 1974 N.C. App. LEXIS 2420, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-hennie-ncctapp-1974.