Roberts v. . Davis

Per OueiaM. Tbe record discloses that exception to tbe charge was as follows: “Defendants except to tbe charge of the court.” This is not specific. In Rawls v. Lupton, 193 N. C., at p. 430, speaking to tbe subject, citing numerous authorities: “Errors must be specifically assigned. An ‘unpointed, broadside’ exception to tbe ‘charge as given’ will not be considered. McKinnon v. Morrison, 104 N. C., 354. Exception to tbe charge of tbe court in general terms, not sufficiently specific to call tbe attention of tbe court to tbe particular point claimed to be erroneous, cannot be considered by an appellate court.” In Cecil v. Lumber Co., 197 N. C., at p. 82, is tbe following: “Tbe assignments of error, appearing on tbe present record, are not sufficiently definite to enable tbe court to understand wbat questions are sought to be presented, without a voyage of discovery through tbe record. Sturtevant v. Cotton Mills, 171 N. C., 119, 87 S. E., 992. Hence, tbe motion of plaintiffs to dismiss tbe appeal and to affirm tbe judgment for failure to comply with Rule 19, section 3, would seem to be well founded. Porter v. Lumber Co., 164 N. C., 396, 80 S. E., 443.” Notwithstanding tbe assignment of error that tbe charge of tbe court below is not properly presented on tbe record, we have examined tbe portion ofi tbe charge pointed out on tbe argument in this Court as error, but can see no prejudicial or reversible error. Tbe charge of tbe court below, as pointed out on tbe argument as error made by tbe court below, ■we think on tbe facts substantially correct. If defendant bad wanted a charge more specific, a prayer should have been requested. On tbe whole record we can see no error. By an examination of tbe records in tbe office of tbe register of deeds it appears that defendant, before she *427 purchased, could have discovered the title of plaintiff to one-third interest in the land. It may be hard measure on the defendant, Mrs. Mary Moore, but, as there is no error in law, we have nothing to do with the findings of fact; that is for the jury to determine. The jury found the disputed facts for plaintiff. • No error.