Smith v. . Texas Co.

156 S.E. 160, 200 N.C. 39, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 14
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedDecember 19, 1930
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 156 S.E. 160 (Smith v. . Texas Co.) 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
Smith v. . Texas Co., 156 S.E. 160, 200 N.C. 39, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 14 (N.C. 1930).

Opinion

Connor, J.

The transcript filed in this Court on defendant’s appeal from the judgment of the Superior Court contains no grouping of exceptions or assignments of error as required by the rules of this Court. Rule 19(3), 192 N. C., p. 847. Defendant’s assignments of error on its appeal from the judgment of the General County Court to the Superior Court of Buncombe County, cannot be considered by this Court. Davis v. Wallace, 190 N. C., 543, 130 S. E., 176. By these assignments of error, defendant presented to the Superior Court its contention that the judgment of the General County Court in this action should be reversed, and the action dismissed, or at least that a new trial should be granted, for errors in matters of law, at the trial in the General County Court; this contention was considered and passed on by the Superior Court, in the exercise of its statutory appellate jurisdiction. O. S., 1608(cc).. Defendant’s contention was not sustained. The judgment of the General County Court was affirmed. Defendant contends that there was error in ' the hearing of its appeal to the Superior Court, and that for this, error the judgment of the Superior Court should be reversed by this Court, to the end that it shall have a new trial in the General County Court.

. On an appeal to this Court from the judgment of the Superior Court, affirming or reversing the judgment of the General County Court, in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction under C. S., 1608(cc), this Court may consider and pass only on the contention of the appellant that there was error in matters of law at the hearing in the Superior Court. This contention must, however, be presented to this Court by assignments of error based on exceptions to specific rulings of the judge of the Superior Court, on the assignments of error appearing in the case on appeal filed *41 in the Superior Court. These assignments of error are based on exceptions taken by the appellant during the course of the trial in the General County Court; they present the appellant’s contentions only as to matters of law, and should be passed upon, specifically, by the judge of the Superior Court. Smith v. City of Winston-Salem, 189 N. C., 178, 126 S. E., 514. In the absence of assignments of error appearing in the transcript on an appeal to this Court, the appeal will ordinarily be dismissed on the motion of the appellee. Where, however, no error appears in the record proper, the judgment may be affirmed.

In the instant case, the only exception appearing in the record, is to the judgment. We find no error in the judgment. The 'exceptions cannot be sustained. The judgment is, therefoi'e,

Affirmed.

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

Related

Worsley v. S. &. W. Rendering Co.
80 S.E.2d 467 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1954)
Fox v. Cramerton Mills, Inc.
35 S.E.2d 869 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1945)
Rader v. Queen City Coach Co.
35 S.E.2d 609 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1945)
Jenkins v. . Castelloe
181 S.E. 266 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1935)
Harrell v. . White
181 S.E. 268 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1935)
Wilson v. City of Charlotte
175 S.E. 306 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1934)
Messer v. . Insurance Co.
171 S.E. 98 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1933)
Messer v. Jefferson Standard Life Insurance Co.
205 N.C. 236 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1933)
McCoy v. Wachovia Bank & Trust Co.
169 S.E. 644 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1933)
Thomason v. . Swenson
169 S.E. 620 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1933)
Baker v. . Clayton
164 S.E. 233 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1932)
Swainey v. . Tea Co.
162 S.E. 557 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1932)
Swainey v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.
202 N.C. 272 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1932)
Woody Bros. Bakery v. Greensboro Life Insurance
161 S.E. 554 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
156 S.E. 160, 200 N.C. 39, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 14, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-texas-co-nc-1930.