§

Mode v. Mode

8 N.C. App. 209 (N.C. Ct. App. 1970)
Mode v. Mode

4 Citing cases

  1. Barnard v. Rowland

    132 N.C. App. 416 (N.C. Ct. App. 1999)   Cited 12 times
    Holding that the party asserting error must show that he was prejudiced by the trial court's error

    [w]hen the jury returns answers to other issues which establish the rights of the parties irrespective of the answer to the questioned issue, or the rights of the parties are not dependent upon the answer to the issue returned by the jury, any error in the instructions upon such issue is harmless.Mode v. Mode, 8 N.C. App. 209, 213, 174 S.E.2d 30, 33-34 (1970). The trial court herein submitted the following pertinent issues to the jury:

  2. Ellinwood v. Ellinwood

    362 S.E.2d 584 (N.C. Ct. App. 1987)   Cited 3 times
    In Ellinwood v. Ellinwood, 88 N.C. App. 119, 123, 362 S.E.2d 584, 587 (1987), we noted that the trial court's findings of fact included post-separation events which could not be used in proving constructive abandonment.

    Additionally, the cumulative effect of mistreatment throughout the years of the marriage may be recited in further support of the constructive abandonment argument. Mode v. Mode, 8 N.C. App. 209, 174 S.E.2d 30 (1970). Here, plaintiff alleges no affirmative acts of physical cruelty nor does she allege a wilful failure to provide adequate monetary support.

  3. Roberts v. Roberts

    68 N.C. App. 163 (N.C. Ct. App. 1984)   Cited 3 times

    However, although the trial judge erred in the admission of this testimony, the error was not prejudicial to plaintiff in light of the evidence supporting the court's findings and conclusions on the issues of abandonment and indignities, which issues effectively established the rights of the parties. Mode v. Mode, 8 N.C. App. 209, 174 S.E.2d 30 (1970). Next, plaintiff contends the court erred in finding and concluding that defendant is the dependent spouse and plaintiff is the supporting spouse.

  4. State v. Turner

    182 S.E.2d 244 (N.C. Ct. App. 1971)   Cited 5 times

    "`Where the court adequately charges the law on every material aspect of the case arising on the evidence and applies the law fairly to the various factual situations presented by the evidence, the charge is sufficient and will not be held error for failure of the court to give instructions on subordinate features of the case, since it is the duty of a party desiring instructions on a subordinate feature . . . to aptly tender a request therefor.'" Mode v. Mode, 8 N.C. App. 209, 174 S.E.2d 30 (1970); 7 Strong, North Carolina Index 2d, Trial, 33 (1968). We have reviewed defendant's other assignments of error and find no merit in any of them.