From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Blankenship

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Sep 1, 1895
23 S.E. 455 (N.C. 1895)

Opinion

(September Term, 1895.)

Practice — Appeal — Exception not Noted in Case on Appeal — Affirmance of Judgment.

Although the refusal to give instructions asked for is deemed excepted to, yet if the exception is not set out by appellant in his case on appeal it is waived, and in such case, no error appearing in the record, the judgment below will be affirmed.

INDICTMENT for forcible entry and detainer, tried at June Term of the Criminal Court for MADISON, before Ewart, J., and a jury.

The defendant was convicted, and appealed.

Attorney-General for the State.

J. M. George, Jr., for defendant.


The defendant asked certain instructions, which were not given. The refusal is deemed excepted to, but if the exception is not set out by the appellant in stating his case on appeal it is waived. Taylor v. Plummer, 105 N.C. 56; Marshall v. Stine, (809) 112 N.C. 697; Davis v. Duval, 112 N.C. 833. Indeed, no exception whatever appears to have been made, and, no error appearing upon the face of the record proper, the judgment must be affirmed. See numerous cases cited in Clark's Code, p. 582, subhead "Where no errors are assigned."

Affirmed.

Cited: Cunningham v. Cunningham, 121 N.C. 417; Wilson v. Wilson, 125 N.C. 527; Hicks v. Kenan, 139 N.C. 338; Hancock v. Tel. Co., 142 N.C. 163.


Summaries of

State v. Blankenship

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Sep 1, 1895
23 S.E. 455 (N.C. 1895)
Case details for

State v. Blankenship

Case Details

Full title:STATE v. W. B. BLANKENSHIP

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Sep 1, 1895

Citations

23 S.E. 455 (N.C. 1895)
117 N.C. 808

Citing Cases

Wilson v. Wilson

The first three were refused, the fourth modified and given as modified in the general charge, and the fifth…

Sawyer v. Lumber Company

This exception, like all other exceptions to defects or errors in the charge, is taken in time if first set…