Case Name: HELEN MOWERY v. M. W. MOWERY
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1915-04-28
Citations: 169 N.C. 248
Docket Number: 
Parties: HELEN MOWERY v. M. W. MOWERY.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 169
Pages: 248–248

Head Matter:
HELEN MOWERY v. M. W. MOWERY.
(Filed 28 April, 1915.)
Appeal and Error — Objections and Exceptions — Evidence—Judgments.
When on appeal from judgment allowing alimony pendente lite in an action for divorce a mensa, etc., tbe judgment alone is excepted to, it will not raise the question of the sufficiency of supporting affidavits or the findings thereon, it being required that appellant assign error by pointing out the particular finding he claims is not supported by the evidence.
Appeal by defendant from order of Rountree, J., made 6 March, 1915; from ÁNSON.
Civil action for divorce a mensa et thoro, beard on motion of tbe plaintiff for alimony pendente lite. From tbe order and judgment rendered the defendant appealed.
Robinson, Caudle & Pruette for plaintiff.
H. II. McLendon, John W. Gulledige for defendant.

Opinion:
PER OuriaM.
Tbe only assignment of error set out in tbe record is in these words: "Tbe defendant assigned as error tbe judgment rendered herein." It is contended by the defendant tbat tbe affidavits and evidence offered upon tbe motion for alimony are insufficient to support tbe findings of fact made by tbe judge.
• No sucb assignment of error is set out in tbe record. If tbe appellant desired to present sucb a contention, be should have assigned bis error by pointing out tbe particular finding of fact which is not supported by tbe evidence.
Nevertheless, we have examined tbe affidavits, and find tbat bis Honor's findings were fully sustained, and they warrant tbe order allowing alimony to tbe plaintiff pendente lite.
Affirmed.