Washington County v. Norfolk Southern Land Co.

24 S.E.2d 338, 222 N.C. 637, 1943 N.C. LEXIS 394
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMarch 3, 1943
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 24 S.E.2d 338 (Washington County v. Norfolk Southern Land 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
Washington County v. Norfolk Southern Land Co., 24 S.E.2d 338, 222 N.C. 637, 1943 N.C. LEXIS 394 (N.C. 1943).

Opinion

Winborne, J.

While it may well be doubted that any valid exceptive assignment of error has been made to appear, it is noted at the threshold of this appeal that the pleadings are not contained in the record. Only excerpts from the complaint are shown in the findings of fact, to which the parties agree. Hence, in accordance with the uniform practice in such cases, the appeal must be dismissed. See S. v. Lumber Co., 207 N. C., 47, 175 S. E., 713, and cases there cited. Rule 19, section 1, of the Rules of Practice in the Supreme Court, 221 N. C., 544, at page 553, requires “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.” And, in Rule 20 of said Rules of Practice, it is provided that “memoranda of pleadings will not be received or recognized in the Supreme Court as pleadings, even by consent.” See Plott v. Construction Co., 198 N. C., 782, 153 S. E., 396. Moreover, it is pointed out in Pruitt v. Wood, 199 N. C., 788, 156 S. E., 126, and in numerous later decisions, “that the rules of this Court, governing appeals, are manda *639 tory and not directory.” “Tbe pleadings are essential in order that we may be advised as to tbe nature of tbe action or proceeding. . . . ~We can judicially know only wbat properly appears on tbe record.” S. v. Lumber Co., supra.

Appeal dismissed.

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

Related

TD Bank, N.A. v. Williams
787 S.E.2d 74 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2016)
Thrush v. Thrush
94 S.E.2d 897 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1956)
Macon v. Murray
81 S.E.2d 126 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1954)
Allen v. Allen
70 S.E.2d 505 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1952)
Smoak v. Newton
67 S.E.2d 462 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1951)
Ericson v. . Ericson
38 S.E.2d 517 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1946)
State v. . Miller
34 S.E.2d 143 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1945)
Barber v. . Minges
25 S.E.2d 837 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1943)
Shepard v. . Leonard
25 S.E.2d 445 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1943)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
24 S.E.2d 338, 222 N.C. 637, 1943 N.C. LEXIS 394, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/washington-county-v-norfolk-southern-land-co-nc-1943.