Case ID: nc_192/html/0231-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Pee OueiaM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

JAMES E. WILSON v. J. K. BEASLEY and WILLIE BEASLEY.
    (Filed 29 September, 1926.)
    Appeal and Error — Reference — Objections and Exceptions — Rules of Court.
    On appeal to the Supreme Court from tbe action of the Superior Court judge in passing upon the report of a referee, the facts found and the conclusions of law by the lower court must be regularly stated with the exceptions thereto in the record of the case on appeal. Rule 19(3), 21, 185 N. C., pp. 794, 795.
    
      Appeal by defendants from Lyon, J., at January Special Term, 1926, of Joi-iNstoN. Affirmed.
    
      E. 8. Abel, J ames Raynor and, Clifford & Townsend for plaintiff.
    
    
      James Best for defendants.
    
   Pee OueiaM.

This Court will not review exceptions to • a referee’s report unless they are passed upon by the court below, and the rulings of the court below are especially assigned as error in the transcript on appeal to the Supreme Court.

Exceptions and assignments of error relied upon on appeal to the Supreme Court should be taken and stated in the record to findings of fact and conclusions of law made by the court below. Rules of Practice in the Supreme Court, Rule 19(3) and 21, 185 N. C., p. 194-5.

On the present record this was not done. There is no evidence in the •record. From the record the only assignment of error from the Rules that we can consider is to the judgment of the court below, to which exception and assignment of error is made to this Court. This was a consent reference. As to reserving trial by jury in compulsory references, see Jenkins v. Parker, ante, 188.

From the findings of fact by the court below, we can discover no reversible or prejudicial error on the record. Therefore the judgment of the court below is

Affirmed.