TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Mowery v. Mowery

Helen Mowery v. M. W. Mowery.

Mowery v. Mowery, 85 S.E. 7 (N.C. 1915)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of North Carolina · State Highest Courts
Decided
April 28, 1915
Judges
OuriaM
Citations
85 S.E. 7169 N.C. 2481915 N.C. LEXIS 193
Headnotes
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.
Summary
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.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — OuriaM

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.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list