Case Name: J. H. HILL et al. v. A. W. AMAN et al.
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1921-03-16
Citations: 181 N.C. 483
Docket Number: 
Parties: J. H. HILL et al. v. A. W. AMAN et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 181
Pages: 483–483

Head Matter:
J. H. HILL et al. v. A. W. AMAN et al.
(Filed 16 March, 1921.)
Appeal and Error — Objections and Exceptions — Briefs.
Appellant’s exceptions of record, not brought forward in his brief, are deemed abandoned in the Supreme Court. Buie 34.
Appeal by defendant Aman from Connor, J., at September Term, 1920, of SampsoN.
Civil action, tried upon exceptions to report of referee. Upon tbe bearing bis Honor modified tbe findings of tbe referee in some particulars, and as tbus amended tbe same was adopted and approved and judgment entered tbereon in favor of tbe plaintiff. Defendant A. W. Aman excepted and appealed.
Grady & Graham and H. F. Faison for plaintiff J. H. Hill.
Butler & Herring and John D. Kerr, Sr., for defendant Aman.

Opinion:
Pee CuRIam.
There are only three assignments of error in tbe record: (1) That tbe court erred in not setting aside tbe findings of fact by tbe referee; (2) that tbe court erred in not sustaining the defendant's first exception to tbe referee's finding of fact; and, (3) that tbe court erred in not sustaining tbe defendant's first exception to tbe referee's conclusion of law. While these assignments of error appear in tbe record, they do not seem to have been brought forward in defendant's brief; and, therefore, are deemed to be abandoned under Rule 34. Notwithstanding this irregularity, we have examined tbe record and find no error of which tbe defendant can justly complain.
Tbe controversy was largely one of fact. It appears upon tbe face of tbe record that tbe case was beard with care and with due regard for tbe rights of tbe parties.
No error.