THEODORE L. MODICA and wife, JEANETTE M. MODICA v. JESSE RODGERS
No. 752DC566
(Filed 5 November 1975)
Appeal and Error § 26— exception to signing of judgment — face of record reviewed
An exception to “the signing and entry of judgment and findings of fact” presents only the face of the record for review.
*333Appeal by plaintiffs from Manning, Judge. Judgment entered 7 March 1975 in District Court, Martin County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 20 October 1975.
This is a civil action wherein the plaintiffs, Theodore L. Módica, and wife, Jeanette M. Módica, allege that defendant, Jesse Rodgers, owes them $800.00 on a modification of defendant’s contract to build plaintiffs’ residence.
Defendant filed answer denying the material allegations of the complaint and alleged a counterclaim seeking to recover $2,549.00 from plaintiffs. After a trial without a jury, the judge made detailed findings of fact and concluded that defendant was indebted to plaintiffs in the sum of $391.76 and that plaintiffs were indebted to defendant in the sum of $391.76. From a judgment that plaintiffs recover nothing of defendant on their claim and that defendant recover nothing of plaintiffs on his counterclaim, plaintiffs appealed.
Milton E. Moore for plaintiff appellants.
Griffin & Martin by Clarence W. Griffin for defendant appellee.
HEDRICK, Judge.
Plaintiffs excepted to “the signing and entry of judgment and findings of fact.” This exception is broadside and does not bring up for review the sufficiency of the evidence to support the findings but presents only the face of the record for review, which includes whether the facts found or admitted support the judgment and whether the judgment is proper in form. Davenport v. Travelers Indemnity Co., 283 N.C. 234, 195 S.E. 2d 529 (1973). Accordingly, we have carefully examined the face of the record and conclude the findings of fact support the judgment entered, and the judgment is proper in form.
Affirmed.
Chief Judge Brock and Judge Clark concur.