Our examination of the record discloses that the crucial finding of consent is supported by the evidence. This works an affirmance of the order.
Affirmed.
WiNBORNE and HiggiNS, JJ., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
Whitfield v. Harvard, 242 N.C. 649 (1955)
Sept. 28, 1955
·
Supreme Court of North Carolina
242 N.C. 649
A. E. WHITFIELD and Wife, MARY ELLEN WHITFIELD, v. LOUIS HARVARD and Wife, ROSA HARVARD.
(Filed 28 September, 1955.)
Appeal by defendants from Parker, J., at February, 1955, Civil Term of Sampson Superior Court.
*650Motion in the cause by defendants to set aside a consent judgment for want of consent thereto.
The court below found as a fact that the defendants consented to the judgment and overruled the motion.
From the order entered in accordance with the foregoing ruling, the defendants appeal. ''
Wright T. Dixon, Jr., for defendants, appellants.
Woodrow H. Peterson and David J. Turlington, Jr., for plaintiffs, appellees.