Jones v. City of High Point

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Jones v. City of High Point

69 S.E. 253, 153 N.C. 371, 1910 N.C. LEXIS 88

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedNovember 2, 1910

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 69 S.E. 253 (Jones v. City of High Point) 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

Jones v. City of High Point, 69 S.E. 253, 153 N.C. 371, 1910 N.C. LEXIS 88 (N.C. 1910).

Pincite

Opinion

ClabK, C. J.

Tbe exceptions are properly grouped at tbe end of tbe case on appeal as required by rule 19 (2). Tbe first two exceptions are for refusal to exclude certain evidence from tbe jury. But tbe case on appeal, as settled by tbe judge, does not sbow tbat any exception was taken to tbe admission of sucb evidence, nor tbat any motion was afterwards made to withdraw tbe evidence from tbe jury, nor tbat sucb motion was refused. Exceptions to tbe evidence must be taken during tbe trial, in apt time. If not so taken, setting tbem out, as assignments of error, cannot avail anything. Lowe v. Elliott, 107 N. C., 720; Patterson v. Mills, 121 N. C., 268; Wilson v. Lumber Co., 131 N. C., 163.

Tbe fourth exception was tbat tbe court permitted tbe jury to consider tbe above evidence, but' as there was no exception to its admission, nor motion to withdraw it from tbe jury or any prayer for instruction in regard to it, and it not being evidence tbat was made incompetent by statute, tbe defendant cannot raise this exception for tbe first time in bis assignments of error. He seems to have been perfectly content with it, until after verdict.

Tbe third exception is for “tbe refusal of tbe court to set aside tbe verdict because tbat it is not supported by tbe evidence.” It does not appear tbat any motion to tbat effect was made and refused. Besides an allegation tbat a verdict is against tbe weight of evidence is a matter not reviewable on appeal. Edwards v. Phifer, 120 N. C., 406, and cases cited. And an *373 exception that there was no evidence cannot be considered unless a motion to that effect is made before the case is submitted to the jury. This has been held by a long line of decisions. S. v. Wilson, 121 N. C., 657; S. v. Harris, 120 N. C., 577, and numerous cases there cited. S. v. Furr, 121 N. C., 608; Printing Co. v. Herbert, 137 N. C., 319; S. v. Holder, 133 N. C., 712.

There being no errors upon the face of the record proper, the judgment is

Affirmed.

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

ClabK, C. J.

Tbe exceptions are properly grouped at tbe end of tbe case on appeal as required by rule 19 (2). Tbe first two exceptions are for refusal to exclude certain evidence from tbe jury. But tbe case on appeal, as settled by tbe judge, does not sbow tbat any exception was taken to tbe admission of sucb evidence, nor tbat any motion was afterwards made to withdraw tbe evidence from tbe jury, nor tbat sucb motion was refused. Exceptions to tbe evidence must be taken during tbe trial, in apt time. If not so taken, setting tbem out, as assignments of error, cannot avail anything. Lowe v. Elliott, 107 N. C., 720; Patterson v. Mills, 121 N. C., 268; Wilson v. Lumber Co., 131 N. C., 163.

Tbe fourth exception was tbat tbe court permitted tbe jury to consider tbe above evidence, but' as there was no exception to its admission, nor motion to withdraw it from tbe jury or any prayer for instruction in regard to it, and it not being evidence tbat was made incompetent by statute, tbe defendant cannot raise this exception for tbe first time in bis assignments of error. He seems to have been perfectly content with it, until after verdict.

Tbe third exception is for “tbe refusal of tbe court to set aside tbe verdict because tbat it is not supported by tbe evidence.” It does not appear tbat any motion to tbat effect was made and refused. Besides an allegation tbat a verdict is against tbe weight of evidence is a matter not reviewable on appeal. Edwards v. Phifer, 120 N. C., 406, and cases cited. And an *373 exception that there was no evidence cannot be considered unless a motion to that effect is made before the case is submitted to the jury. This has been held by a long line of decisions. S. v. Wilson, 121 N. C., 657; S. v. Harris, 120 N. C., 577, and numerous cases there cited. S. v. Furr, 121 N. C., 608; Printing Co. v. Herbert, 137 N. C., 319; S. v. Holder, 133 N. C., 712.

There being no errors upon the face of the record proper, the judgment is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

69 S.E. 253, 153 N.C. 371, 1910 N.C. LEXIS 88, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-city-of-high-point-nc-1910.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack