
    BERTHA M. HARRELL v. LORA B. WHITE, Administratrix, et al.
    (Filed 18 September, 1935.)
    Appeal and Error E c — When Superior Court affirms the judgment of the county court, appellant must bring forward exceptions relied upon.
    Where, on appeal from judgment of the general county court to the Superior Court on matters of law, the Superior Court overrules each of the exceptions relied upon by appellant, upon further appeal to the Supreme Court the appellant should bring forward each ruling of the Superior Court on the exceptions deemed erroneous, and properly group them and assign same as error, Rule 19 (3), and where appellant merely assigns as error “the judgment of the Superior Court,” the appeal will be dismissed or the judgment affirmed.
    Appeal by defendants from Small, J., at November Term, 1934, of Beetle.
    Civil action in trover to recover personal property in possession of defendants, both parties claiming title thereto, instituted and tried in the general county court of Bertie County, where verdict and judgment were rendered for plaintiff. On appeal to the Superior Court, on matters of law, eighteen exceptions were assigned as error. All exceptions and assignments of error were overruled, and the judgment of the general county court was affirmed. Whereupon the defendants appeal, assigning as error “the judgment of the Superior Court.”
    
      J. B, Davenport for plaintiff.
    
    
      J. A. Pritchett for defendants.
    
   Stacy, O. J.

The situation presented by the record in this case is identical with that appearing in the case of Smith v. Texas Co., 200 N. C., 39, 156 S. E., 160. There, the transcript contained no grouping o£ exceptions or assignments of error as required by Rule 19 (3) of the Rules of Practice in the Supreme Court. 200 N. C., 824. It was said that upon motion of appellee the appeal would be dismissed or the judgment affirmed. The same may be repeated here.

The judgment will be affirmed on authority of the Smith case. See converse of proposition in Jenkins v. Castelloe, ante, 406.

Affirmed.  