McArthur ex rel. McArthur v. Stanfield

119 S.E.2d 467, 254 N.C. 627, 1961 N.C. LEXIS 498
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMay 3, 1961
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 119 S.E.2d 467 (McArthur ex rel. McArthur v. Stanfield) 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
McArthur ex rel. McArthur v. Stanfield, 119 S.E.2d 467, 254 N.C. 627, 1961 N.C. LEXIS 498 (N.C. 1961).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The evidence was amply sufficient to support a verdict in plaintiff’s favor on the issues raised and submitted. Indeed, this was conceded by defendants’ counsel on oral argument.

In an assignment of error, “(a)lways the very error relied upon [629]*629should be definitely and clearly presented, and the Court not compelled to go beyond the assignment itself to learn what the question is.” Allen v. Allen, 244 N.C. 446, 450, 94 S.E. 2d 325; Steelman v. Benfield, 228 N.C. 651, 653, 46 S.E. 2d 829, and cases cited. Many of defendants’ assignments of error are defective in that they do not point out in what respect defendants consider erroneous the court’s rulings or instructions. Notwithstanding these deficiencies, each of defendants’ exceptions has been carefully considered. Suffice to say, we find no error of law deemed sufficiently prejudicial to warrant a new trial.

No error.

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

Related

Kleinfeldt v. Shoney's of Charlotte, Inc.
127 S.E.2d 573 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1962)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
119 S.E.2d 467, 254 N.C. 627, 1961 N.C. LEXIS 498, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcarthur-ex-rel-mcarthur-v-stanfield-nc-1961.