Court Opinion

ID: 9807355
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 20:01:33.227738+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:34:43.445498
License: Public Domain

Stacy, C. L,
concurs in result, but dissents in part from the reasons assigned.
1. There is no exception to the refusal of .the defendant’s request for special instruction, and no assignment of error based thereon. Hence, the correctness of the prayer is not presented for review.
2. The exception based upon the court’s failure to comply with C. S., 564, is dismissed on authority of Rawls v. Lupton, 193 N. C., 428, 137 S. E., 175, because of its alleged broadsidedness. With this I do not agree. The form of the exception is not unlike the one held sufficient in Smith v. Bus Co., 216 N. C., 22, 3 S. E. (2d), 362. The exception should be overruled on its lack of merit rather than on its deformity.
BaRNhill and WiNBORNE, JJ., concur in this opinion.