#### JAMES ARTHUR PRINGLE, JR. v. DANA FREEMAN PRINGLE

No. 7226DC761

(Filed 22 November 1972)

Appeal and Error § 62— stipulation that order contains reversible error — new trial

Appellant is entitled to a new trial where it was stipulated that the order appealed from contains reversible error.

Appeal by defendant from Arbuckle, District Judge, 10 April 1972 Session of District Court held in Mecklenburg County.

*649 Olive, Howard & Downer by Leon Olive for plaintiff ap-pellee.

Ruff, Perry, Bond, Cobb, Wade & McNair by Hamlin L. Wade for defendant appellant.

MALLARD, Chief Judge.

On 26 October 1972, the date this cause was calendared for oral argument in this court, the parties, through their respective counsel, filed a written stipulation which contains among other things the following:

“1. The Order entered by the Honorable Howard B. Ar-buclde, Jr., on April 20, 1972, in the above matter contains errors which subject it to being reversible on appeal.”

Inasmuch as the order dated 20 April 1972, in which reversible error was stipulated, was the order appealed from, the appellant is entitled to a new trial.

New trial.

Judges Brock and Britt concur.