Union Central Life Insurance v. Bullard
This text of 178 S.E. 113 (Union Central Life Insurance v. Bullard) 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.
Opinion
It will be observed that there is an apparent conflict between what appears in the judgment and the case on appeal. Where such conflict exists, the recitals appearing in the record proper are controlling. Bartholomew v. Parrish, 190 N. C., 151, 129 S. E., 190; Moore v. Moore, 185 N. C., 332, 117 S. E., 12; S. v. Wheeler, 185 N. C., 670, 116 S. E., 413. “Where there is a repugnancy between the record and the case stated, the record will control.” S. v. Keeter, 80 N. C., 472.
But for another reason the appeal must be dismissed. It is agreed “that the affidavits, summons, and pleadings were in due form,” and therefore they were omitted from the record. This is fatal to the appeal. Riggan v. Harrison, 203 N. C., 191, 165 S. E., 358; Waters v. Waters, 199 N. C., 667, 155 S. E., 564. It is provided by Rule 19, sec. 1, of the Rules of Bractice that “the pleadings on which the case is tried, the issues, and the judgment appealed from shall be a part of the transcript in all cases.” The pleadings are essential in order that we may be advised as to the nature of the action or proceeding. Waters v. Waters, supra. We can judicially know only what properly appears on the record. S. v. Lumber Co., ante, 47, 175 S. E., 713.
Appeal dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
178 S.E. 113, 207 N.C. 652, 1935 N.C. LEXIS 236, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/union-central-life-insurance-v-bullard-nc-1935.