Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
24 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1903–1974 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by North Carolina courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Ayscue
green
2 sentences1972The defendant having presented no assignments of error, the appeal itself is an exception to the judgment, State v. Ayscue, 240 N.C. 196 , 81 S.E. 2d 403 (1954) ; defendant’s exception to the judgment presents the face of the record for review, which review is ordinarily limited to the question of whether error of law appears on the face of the record and whether the judgment is regular in form, State v. Kirby, 276 N.C. 123 , 171 S.E. 2d 416 (1970) ; when no error appears on the face of the record proper, and the judgment is within the statutory limitations prescribed and is predicated upon a 1972The defendant having presented no assignments of error, the appeal itself is an exception to the judgment, State v. Ayscue, 240 N.C. 196 , 81 S.E. 2d 403 (1954) ; defendant’s exception to the judgment presents the face of the record for review, which review is ordinarily limited to the question of whether error of law appears on the face of the record and whether the judgment is regular in form, State v. Kirby, 276 N.C. 123 , 171 S.E. 2d 416 (1970) ; when no error appears on the face of the record proper, and the judgment is within the statutory limitations prescribed and is predicated upon a | 7 | 1959–1972 |
State v. Sloan
neutral
2 sentences1972The defendant having presented no assignments of error, the appeal itself is an exception to the judgment, State v. Ayscue, 240 N.C. 196 , 81 S.E. 2d 403 (1954) ; defendant’s exception to the judgment presents the face of the record for review, which review is ordinarily limited to the question of whether error of law appears on the face of the record and whether the judgment is regular in form, State v. Kirby, 276 N.C. 123 , 171 S.E. 2d 416 (1970) ; when no error appears on the face of the record proper, and the judgment is within the statutory limitations prescribed and is predicated upon a 1972The defendant having presented no assignments of error, the appeal itself is an exception to the judgment, State v. Ayscue, 240 N.C. 196 , 81 S.E. 2d 403 (1954) ; defendant’s exception to the judgment presents the face of the record for review, which review is ordinarily limited to the question of whether error of law appears on the face of the record and whether the judgment is regular in form, State v. Kirby, 276 N.C. 123 , 171 S.E. 2d 416 (1970) ; when no error appears on the face of the record proper, and the judgment is within the statutory limitations prescribed and is predicated upon a | 5 | 1954–1972 |
State v. Williams
green
2 sentences1970State v. Ayscue, 240 N.C. 196 , 81 S.E. 2d 403 ; State v. Williams, 235 N.C. 429 , 70 S.E. 2d 1 ; State v. Hitchcock, 4 N.C. 1970State v. Ayscue, 240 N.C. 196 , 81 S.E. 2d 403 ; State v. Williams, 235 N.C. 429 , 70 S.E. 2d 1 ; State v. Hitchcock, 4 N.C. | 3 | 1969–1970 |
Wallace v. . Salisbury
green
2 sentences1947This, however, would be contrary to tbe practice of tbe Court and established precedent. ■ It is held in North Carolina, Bessemer Co. v. Piedmont Hardware Co., 171 N. C., 728 , 88 S. E., 867 , and in Wallace v. Salisbury, 147 N. C., 58 , 60 S. E., 713 , tbat no separate assignment of error is necessary where there is but a single exception and this is presented by tbe record, nor where tbe case is beard below on an agreed statement of facts, nor where *46 the exception to the judgment is the only one taken — and'the appeal itself is an exception thereto. 1947This, however, would be contrary to tbe practice of tbe Court and established precedent. ■ It is held in North Carolina, Bessemer Co. v. Piedmont Hardware Co., 171 N. C., 728 , 88 S. E., 867 , and in Wallace v. Salisbury, 147 N. C., 58 , 60 S. E., 713 , tbat no separate assignment of error is necessary where there is but a single exception and this is presented by tbe record, nor where tbe case is beard below on an agreed statement of facts, nor where *46 the exception to the judgment is the only one taken — and'the appeal itself is an exception thereto. | 3 | 1923–1947 |
State v. Hitchcock
neutral
2 sentences1970State v. Ayscue, 240 N.C. 196 , 81 S.E. 2d 403 ; State v. Williams, 235 N.C. 429 , 70 S.E. 2d 1 ; State v. Hitchcock, 4 N.C. 1969State v. Ayscue, 240 N.C. 196 , 81 S.E. 2d 403 ; State v. Williams, 235 N.C. 429 , 70 S.E. 2d 1 ; State v. Hitchcock, 4 N.C. | 2 | 1969–1970 |
State v. Elliott
green
2 sentences1970State v. Elliott, 269 N.C. 683 , 153 S.E. 2d 330 (1967). 1970State v. Elliott, 269 N.C. 683 , 153 S.E. 2d 330 (1967). | 2 | 1969–1970 |
London v. London
green
2 sentences1969State v. Ayscue, 240 N.C. 196 , 81 S.E. 2d 403 ; London v. London, 271 N.C. 568 , 157 S.E. 2d 90 . 1969State v. Ayscue, 240 N.C. 196 , 81 S.E. 2d 403 ; London v. London, 271 N.C. 568 , 157 S.E. 2d 90 . | 2 | 1969–1969 |
North Carolina Bessemer Co. v. Piedmont Hardware Co.
neutral
2 sentences1947This, however, would be contrary to tbe practice of tbe Court and established precedent. ■ It is held in North Carolina, Bessemer Co. v. Piedmont Hardware Co., 171 N. C., 728 , 88 S. E., 867 , and in Wallace v. Salisbury, 147 N. C., 58 , 60 S. E., 713 , tbat no separate assignment of error is necessary where there is but a single exception and this is presented by tbe record, nor where tbe case is beard below on an agreed statement of facts, nor where *46 the exception to the judgment is the only one taken — and'the appeal itself is an exception thereto. 1947This, however, would be contrary to tbe practice of tbe Court and established precedent. ■ It is held in North Carolina, Bessemer Co. v. Piedmont Hardware Co., 171 N. C., 728 , 88 S. E., 867 , and in Wallace v. Salisbury, 147 N. C., 58 , 60 S. E., 713 , tbat no separate assignment of error is necessary where there is but a single exception and this is presented by tbe record, nor where tbe case is beard below on an agreed statement of facts, nor where *46 the exception to the judgment is the only one taken — and'the appeal itself is an exception thereto. | 2 | 1923–1947 |
Stancil v. Stancil
green
2 sentences1974Stancil v. Stancil, 255 N.C. 507 , 121 S.E. 2d 882 (1961). 1974Stancil v. Stancil, 255 N.C. 507 , 121 S.E. 2d 882 (1961). | 1 | 1974–1974 |
State v. Barnes
neutral
1 sentence1974State v. Barnes, 18 N.C. | 1 | 1974–1974 |
State v. Williams
neutral
2 sentences1973State v. Smith, 279 N.C. 505 , 183 S.E. 2d 649 ; State v. Higgs, 270 N.C. 111 , 153 S.E. 2d 781 , State v. Williams, 268 N.C. 295 , 150 S.E. 2d 447 . 1973State v. Smith, 279 N.C. 505 , 183 S.E. 2d 649 ; State v. Higgs, 270 N.C. 111 , 153 S.E. 2d 781 , State v. Williams, 268 N.C. 295 , 150 S.E. 2d 447 . | 1 | 1973–1973 |
State v. Smith
green
2 sentences1973State v. Smith, 279 N.C. 505 , 183 S.E. 2d 649 ; State v. Higgs, 270 N.C. 111 , 153 S.E. 2d 781 , State v. Williams, 268 N.C. 295 , 150 S.E. 2d 447 . 1973State v. Smith, 279 N.C. 505 , 183 S.E. 2d 649 ; State v. Higgs, 270 N.C. 111 , 153 S.E. 2d 781 , State v. Williams, 268 N.C. 295 , 150 S.E. 2d 447 . | 1 | 1973–1973 |
State v. Higgs
green
2 sentences1973State v. Smith, 279 N.C. 505 , 183 S.E. 2d 649 ; State v. Higgs, 270 N.C. 111 , 153 S.E. 2d 781 , State v. Williams, 268 N.C. 295 , 150 S.E. 2d 447 . 1973State v. Smith, 279 N.C. 505 , 183 S.E. 2d 649 ; State v. Higgs, 270 N.C. 111 , 153 S.E. 2d 781 , State v. Williams, 268 N.C. 295 , 150 S.E. 2d 447 . | 1 | 1973–1973 |
State v. Darnell
neutral
2 sentences1972The defendant having presented no assignments of error, the appeal itself is an exception to the judgment, State v. Ayscue, 240 N.C. 196 , 81 S.E. 2d 403 (1954) ; defendant’s exception to the judgment presents the face of the record for review, which review is ordinarily limited to the question of whether error of law appears on the face of the record and whether the judgment is regular in form, State v. Kirby, 276 N.C. 123 , 171 S.E. 2d 416 (1970) ; when no error appears on the face of the record proper, and the judgment is within the statutory limitations prescribed and is predicated upon a 1972The defendant having presented no assignments of error, the appeal itself is an exception to the judgment, State v. Ayscue, 240 N.C. 196 , 81 S.E. 2d 403 (1954) ; defendant’s exception to the judgment presents the face of the record for review, which review is ordinarily limited to the question of whether error of law appears on the face of the record and whether the judgment is regular in form, State v. Kirby, 276 N.C. 123 , 171 S.E. 2d 416 (1970) ; when no error appears on the face of the record proper, and the judgment is within the statutory limitations prescribed and is predicated upon a | 1 | 1972–1972 |
State v. Kirby
green
2 sentences1972The defendant having presented no assignments of error, the appeal itself is an exception to the judgment, State v. Ayscue, 240 N.C. 196 , 81 S.E. 2d 403 (1954) ; defendant’s exception to the judgment presents the face of the record for review, which review is ordinarily limited to the question of whether error of law appears on the face of the record and whether the judgment is regular in form, State v. Kirby, 276 N.C. 123 , 171 S.E. 2d 416 (1970) ; when no error appears on the face of the record proper, and the judgment is within the statutory limitations prescribed and is predicated upon a 1972The defendant having presented no assignments of error, the appeal itself is an exception to the judgment, State v. Ayscue, 240 N.C. 196 , 81 S.E. 2d 403 (1954) ; defendant’s exception to the judgment presents the face of the record for review, which review is ordinarily limited to the question of whether error of law appears on the face of the record and whether the judgment is regular in form, State v. Kirby, 276 N.C. 123 , 171 S.E. 2d 416 (1970) ; when no error appears on the face of the record proper, and the judgment is within the statutory limitations prescribed and is predicated upon a | 1 | 1972–1972 |
State v. Jackson
neutral
2 sentences1972State v. Jackson, 279 N.C. 503 , 183 S.E. 2d 550 (1971); 3 Strong, N. C. 1972State v. Jackson, 279 N.C. 503 , 183 S.E. 2d 550 (1971); 3 Strong, N. C. | 1 | 1972–1972 |
Barnette v. Woody
green
2 sentences1971Barnette v. Woody, 242 N.C. 424 , 88 S.E. 2d 223 (1955). 1971Barnette v. Woody, 242 N.C. 424 , 88 S.E. 2d 223 (1955). | 1 | 1971–1971 |
Dilday v. Beaufort County Board of Education
green
2 sentences1970Balint v. Grayson, 256 N.C. 490 , 124 S.E. 2d 364 ; Dilday v. Board of Education, 267 N.C. 438 , 148 S.E. 2d 513 ; Cratch v. Taylor, 256 N.C. 462 , 124 S.E. 2d 124 . 1970Balint v. Grayson, 256 N.C. 490 , 124 S.E. 2d 364 ; Dilday v. Board of Education, 267 N.C. 438 , 148 S.E. 2d 513 ; Cratch v. Taylor, 256 N.C. 462 , 124 S.E. 2d 124 . | 1 | 1970–1970 |
Cratch v. Taylor
green
2 sentences1970Balint v. Grayson, 256 N.C. 490 , 124 S.E. 2d 364 ; Dilday v. Board of Education, 267 N.C. 438 , 148 S.E. 2d 513 ; Cratch v. Taylor, 256 N.C. 462 , 124 S.E. 2d 124 . 1970Balint v. Grayson, 256 N.C. 490 , 124 S.E. 2d 364 ; Dilday v. Board of Education, 267 N.C. 438 , 148 S.E. 2d 513 ; Cratch v. Taylor, 256 N.C. 462 , 124 S.E. 2d 124 . | 1 | 1970–1970 |
Balint v. Grayson
neutral
2 sentences1970Balint v. Grayson, 256 N.C. 490 , 124 S.E. 2d 364 ; Dilday v. Board of Education, 267 N.C. 438 , 148 S.E. 2d 513 ; Cratch v. Taylor, 256 N.C. 462 , 124 S.E. 2d 124 . 1970Balint v. Grayson, 256 N.C. 490 , 124 S.E. 2d 364 ; Dilday v. Board of Education, 267 N.C. 438 , 148 S.E. 2d 513 ; Cratch v. Taylor, 256 N.C. 462 , 124 S.E. 2d 124 . | 1 | 1970–1970 |
Hall v. . Robinson
neutral
2 sentences1970Hall v. Robinson, 228 N.C. 44 , 44 S.E. 2d 345 . 1970Hall v. Robinson, 228 N.C. 44 , 44 S.E. 2d 345 . | 1 | 1970–1970 |
State v. Barham
neutral
2 sentences1961S. v. Barham, 251 N.C. 207 , 110 S.E. 2d 894 ; S. v. Ayscue, 240 N.C. 196 , 81 S.E. 2d 403 ; S. v. Sloan, 238 N.C. 672 , 78 S.E. 2d 738 . *349 This Court has repeatedly held that in a bill of indictment charging an assault with intent to commit rape, the lesser offense of assault and battery may be found to have been committed, and it is not necessary for the indictment to allege that the defendant, at the time he committed the assault, was over the age of eighteen years. 1961S. v. Barham, 251 N.C. 207 , 110 S.E. 2d 894 ; S. v. Ayscue, 240 N.C. 196 , 81 S.E. 2d 403 ; S. v. Sloan, 238 N.C. 672 , 78 S.E. 2d 738 . *349 This Court has repeatedly held that in a bill of indictment charging an assault with intent to commit rape, the lesser offense of assault and battery may be found to have been committed, and it is not necessary for the indictment to allege that the defendant, at the time he committed the assault, was over the age of eighteen years. | 1 | 1961–1961 |
Cannon v. City of Wilmington
green
2 sentences1957Cannon v. Wilmington, 242 N.C. 711 , 89 S.E. 2d 595 ; Ellis v. R. 1957Cannon v. Wilmington, 242 N.C. 711 , 89 S.E. 2d 595 ; Ellis v. R. | 1 | 1957–1957 |
Allen v. . Griffin
neutral
2 sentences1947In accord with this rule are Allen v. Griffin, 98 N. C., 120, 121 , 3 S. E., 837 , and Lytle v. Lytle, 94 N. C., 522, 523 ; McIntosh, North Carolina Practice and Procedure, Sec. 679, and cases cited. 1947In accord with this rule are Allen v. Griffin, 98 N. C., 120, 121 , 3 S. E., 837 , and Lytle v. Lytle, 94 N. C., 522, 523 ; McIntosh, North Carolina Practice and Procedure, Sec. 679, and cases cited. | 1 | 1947–1947 |
Lytle v. . Lytle
neutral
1 sentence1947In accord with this rule are Allen v. Griffin, 98 N. C., 120, 121 , 3 S. E., 837 , and Lytle v. Lytle, 94 N. C., 522, 523 ; McIntosh, North Carolina Practice and Procedure, Sec. 679, and cases cited. | 1 | 1947–1947 |
City of Greensboro v. McAdoo
neutral
1 sentence1923In regard to this, he says: “I cannot just here name the volume I saw this in, but it is somewhere in the volumes which I have read from 140 to 183 inclusive.” Appellant doubtless has in mind the cases of Bessemer Co. v. Hardware Co., 171 N. C., 728 ; Greensboro v. McAdoo, 112 N. C., 359 ; Wallace v. Salisbury, 147 N. C., 58 , and others to like effect, holding that no assignment of error is necessary where there is but a single exception and this is presented by the record, nor where the case is heard below on an agreed *312 statement of facts, nor when the exception to the judgment is the on | 1 | 1923–1923 |
Cape Fear & Northern Railroad v. Stewart
neutral
1 sentence1907Railroad v. Stewart, 132 N. C., 248 . | 1 | 1907–1907 |
State Ex Rel. Clark v. Peebles
neutral
1 sentence1903Clark v. Peebles, 120 N. C., 31 , and an appeal itself is an exception to the judgment. | 1 | 1903–1903 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.