Case law

Lake v. State Health Plan for Tchrs. and State Emps.

Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 11, 2022

Sess. 1982) 288, 289-311 (Establishing Act). … The moving party has the burden of clearly establishing the lack of triable issue, and his papers are carefully scrutinized and those of the opposing party are

State v. Blagg

Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 11, 2021

Regardless, Maxwell explicitly qualified his statement by noting that a seller might package methamphetamine in different quantities “depending on what the buyer is wanting. … ¶ 43 Finally, the majority’s analysis does not clearly identify the basis for its holding.

In re A.A.

Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 17, 2022

IN RE A.A. 2022-NCSC-66 Opinion of the Court period of more than five years not only encompasses but clearly … payment of child support, nonetheless this consistency of payment of child support funds which was known by respondent-mother to be directed by the trial court to the father rather than to petitioner neither mandatorily qualifies

Bank v. . Wysong Miles Co.

177 N.C. 285 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 2, 1919

The intent may be construed by the law upon the face of the usurious contract, as we have clearly shown, or it may be proved as a fact. … They swore to the fact of retaining the 20 per cent, and it is claimed by defendant to be, therefore, competent for them to state that it was done under an order given at the same time, which was pars res gestae as qualifying

State v. Elliott

344 N.C. 242 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 6, 1996

Sinai, who was qualified as an expert in pediatrics and child abuse, gave extensive testimony with respect to the nature and extent of Brandie’s injuries. … We conclude that the legislature clearly expressed its intent to punish a defendant cumulatively for felony child abuse and first-degree murder convictions arising out of the same conduct.

Coman v. Thomas Manufacturing Co.

325 N.C. 172 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 26, 1989

There must be protection from substantial impairment of the very legitimate interests of an employer in hiring and retaining the most qualified personnel available or the very foundation of the free enterprise system could … Clearly, the Haskins opinion recognizes the good-faith exception, and Chief Justice Stacy in Malever uses the phrase an indefinite general hiring "terminable in good faith" at the will of either party, citing "35 Am.Jur.

Wachovia Bank & Trust Co., N.A. v. Rubish

306 N.C. 417 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Aug 3, 1982

Baker died on 9 June 1976, and Wachovia Bank and Trust Company qualified under his will as executor and trustee of his estate. Ms. Jean Holleman was assigned responsibility for the estate. Under Mr. … These principles are reflected in our own cases, even though they may not have been quite so clearly expounded. For example, in Kearney v.

State v. Daughtry

340 N.C. 488 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 28, 1995

Boodee qualified as an expert, and his scientific testimony could assist the jury in determining whether defendant killed the victim. … Defendant argues that the trial court committed constitutional error by denying his motion to prohibit death-qualifying questions during voir dire.

State v. Thompson

359 N.C. 77 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 3, 2004

Special Agent David Santora of the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation was qualified at trial as an expert in firearm and toolmark identification. … In light of the above analysis, defendant’s case is clearly distinguishable from those in which we have held the death penalty to be disproportionate.

State v. Johnson

298 N.C. 355 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 6, 1979

In instant case, there is no suggestion that the jurors who were impaneled were prejudiced against defendant or were otherwise not qualified or competent to serve. … This section clearly indicates the Legislature’s intention that the jury’s sentence recommendation be binding on the trial judge.

In re K.M.W.

Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 18, 2020

The guardian ad litem argues that, “[a]fter she chose to retain counsel, [respondent-mother] did not qualify for appointed counsel as she was not indigent” due to her SSI disability back payment in the amount of $7,440, … As the record clearly reflects, the waiver of counsel form that respondent-mother completed at the time that Mr.

Stewart v. Railroad

141 N.C. 253 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 1, 1906

After qualifying Mr. … The reasoning of the interesting opinion by the present Chief Justice shows clearly that the being in general use is the test. His Honor evidently had that test in view in giving the instruction.

State v. Chandler

342 N.C. 742 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 8, 1996

If the charge as a whole presents the law fairly and clearly to the jury, the fact that isolated expressions, standing alone, might be considered erroneous will afford no ground for a reversal. State v. … Poore after he struck her, but instead left her in her bed in a pool of blood to die. *763 After the murder, defendant immediately began a failed, attempt to establish an alibi. He lied to the police.

State v. Ratliff

281 N.C. 397 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 16, 1972

His subsequent police-baiting conduct clearly indicated that he did understand them, that he answered only those questions he wanted to answer, and that he felt no compulsion to answer any of them. … While the admissions may have been proper on a charge of carrying a concealed weapon, before they could be used as evidence on a charge of murder in the first degree, they had to qualify under G.S. § 7A-457.

State v. . Newsome

195 N.C. 552 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 9, 1928

Linville, the psychiatrist, who examined the defendant for the purpose of qualifying himself to testify as to the mental condition of defendant, at the time of the homicide. … The doctrine thus clearly stated is now and has since been the law in this State, with respect to this matter. S. v. Gadberry is expressly overruled in S. v. Spivey .

State v. Bowditch

364 N.C. 335 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 8, 2010

The risk of recidivism posed by sex offenders has been widely documented and is well established. … As a condition of adult criminal probation, electronic monitoring now qualifies as an intermediate punishment...." Stevens H.

Cocke v. Duke University

260 N.C. 1 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 19, 1963

Dickey testified: “I would say that the exercise of prudence, all other things being equal, would dictate definitely that the funds would be safer with a greater degree of diversification. . .1 'am clearly of the opinion … Duke Power Co. and its subsidiaries to the trustees “as the prime investment for the funds of this trust” and requested the trustees “to >see to it that at all times these companies be managed and operated by the men best qualified

Azzolino v. Dingfelder

315 N.C. 103 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 10, 1985

Courts which have recognized claims for wrongful birth have failed to establish a clear trend or any real trend at all with regard to the measure of damages to be allowed. … To deny, as the majority does, any remedy for a physician's negligently withholding information or negligently providing misinformation so immunizes the physician as to encourage the physician himself, in effect, to make

State v. Jones

317 N.C. 487 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Aug 12, 1986

These cases establish that in capital cases, we may review the prosecutor’s argument to determine whether the argument was so grossly improper that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to intervene ex mero motu … By his final assignment of error, defendant contends that he “is entitled to a new trial because the constitution prohibits a death qualified jury to pass on the defendant’s guilt or innocence.”

State v. Hill

279 N.C. 371 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 7, 1971

Clearly the mandate to this Court contemplates "further proceedings." The mandate, *98 therefore, is not self-executing. Otherwise there would be no necessity for "further proceedings." … the pardoning power is, by constitutional provision, vested in an executive officer, the courts have no jurisdiction in criminal cases to exercise a power to pardon, commute or reprieve; nor have they authority to grant immunity