Case law

McCrann v. Pinehurst, LLC

225 N.C. App. 368 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 5, 2013

. *370 Background The record establishes that the town of Pinehurst, North Carolina was established on land once owned by Mr. Leonard Tufts. Mr. … As plaintiffs have not established that the original covenanting parties intended for the covenant to benefit them, they have not established their right to enforce the restrictive covenants under the theory of equitable

Smith v. Barbour

195 N.C. App. 244 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 3, 2009

This date qualifies as a clear and specific reconvening time after a time interval that was reasonably brief. Mr. … It is well-established that, at least as between parents, “visitation” is part of custody. See N.C. Gen.

Southern Railway Co. v. Hutton & Bourbonnais Co.

10 N.C. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 16, 1970

By this assignment of error, Southern contends that the trial judge committed prejudicial error in allowing the defendant’s witness Charles Em-mitt to testify as to the speed of the train without any qualifying testimony … That Hutton’s employee was negligent and that his negligence was a proximate cause of the collision and resulting damage is clearly established by all the evidence.

Moore's Ferry Development Corp. v. City of Hickory

166 N.C. App. 441 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 21, 2004

Facts The record tends to establish the following: Plaintiff is a North Carolina corporation in the real estate development business. … We recognize that the determination of whether something qualifies as a fixture is a fact-specific inquiry.

Koltis v. NC DEPT. OF HUMAN RESOURCES

480 S.E.2d 702 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 4, 1997

We find that the uncontroverted evidence in the record establishes two legally binding contracts for a specific duration between Mr. Boardman and Dr. Koltis. PCMH next contends that even if the contracts with Mr. … Boardman were clearly to "develop" the center.

United Leasing Corp. v. Miller

60 N.C. App. 40 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 21, 1982

As the material facts were clearly known to plaintiff from the outset, plaintiff’s delay was entirely undue. … These tasks are listed as items twelve (c) and (d) on Tennent’s checklist. (12)(c) Appraisal on each property in simple letter form from a qualified appraiser.

State v. Garrett

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 18, 2021

We hold that Fentanyl does indeed qualify as an opiate within the meaning of the statute. … ¶ 24 In conclusion, because Fentanyl qualified as an opiate under N.C. Gen. Stat.

Setzer v. Boise Cascade Corp.

123 N.C. App. 441 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 6, 1996

Rule 28 summarizes the function and content of appellate briefs and requires the parties to clearly define the questions presented to the reviewing court. N.C.R.App. P. 28(a). … Williams also relied on other textbook materials to support his position that a link has been established between occupation and the incidence of pancreatic cancer.

A.H. Beck Foundation Co. v. Jones Bros.

166 N.C. App. 672 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 2, 2004

its immunity from suit.” … Stat. § 136-29 as well as the Standard Specifications, and thus qualify as a final estimate.

Chapel Hill Spa Health Club, Inc. v. Goodman

90 N.C. App. 198 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 17, 1988

However, each party, without objection by the other, offered testimony at trial establishing the existence and terms of both the offer to renew and the oral referral agreement. … This transaction clearly constitutes a “sale of . . . services . . . with other consideration to the purchaser that is contingent upon the procurement of prospective customers provided by the purchaser.”

Haley v. ABB, Inc.

174 N.C. App. 469 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 15, 2003

"[F]indings of fact to which [an appellant] has not assigned error and argued in his brief are conclusively established on appeal." Static Control Components, Inc. v. … The assignment of error must clearly disclose the question presented.

State ex rel. Utilities Commission v. Mebane Home Telephone Co.

35 N.C. App. 588 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Mar 21, 1978

In this regard, General Telephone Company, in which the Supreme Court reversed the Commission for *595 giving minimal consideration to replacement cost, is clearly distinguishable since in that case the Commission “failed … Mebane Home has qualified for loans from the Rural Electrification Administration.

Brooks v. BCF Piping, Inc.

109 N.C. App. 26 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 16, 1993

By BCF’s first assignment of error, it contends that the trial court erred in ruling that BCF’s reliance on the plant’s qualified electrician was insufficient as a matter of law. … “The effectiveness of this particular safety standard would be nullified and the manifest intent of the Act defeated if an employer could delegate a duty clearly enjoined upon him to another.” Id.

State v. Murchinson

39 N.C. App. 163 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 19, 1978

Clearly, as stated above, the purpose of the statute was to exempt law enforcement officers in the performance of their duty. … We hold that the inferences drawn from the evidence that tends to establish defendant’s possession of the vehicle shortly after its theft are sufficient to withstand defendant’s motion for nonsuit.

Hoke County Board of Education v. State

222 N.C. App. 406 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 21, 2012

The program was established, *409 in part, as a reaction to a pair of rulings by our Supreme Court, Leandro I and Leandro II. In Leandro v. … These criteria were not static or set in stone for all time, but rather were qualified by phrases such as “to enable the student to function in a complex and rapidly changing society!

State v. Rupe

109 N.C. App. 601 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 20, 1993

If the consultant recommended building a retirement community, Williams would begin securing financing by establishing a limited partnership of investors which would own the project. … The potential purchasers clearly had a right to cancel and obtain a refund of their reservation deposit. In accord, the deposit money given to reserve a unit was still rightfully owned by the purchaser.

State v. Odom

99 N.C. App. 265 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 3, 1990

Clearly, the property was within defendant’s exclusive possession and control. … We conclude that under Williams and Austin , Pressley was a qualified witness and his testimony was admissible to prove value of the stolen merchandise. IV.

Bursell v. General Electric Co.

172 N.C. App. 73 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 2, 2005

App. 717, 721 , 589 S.E.2d 384, 387 (2003) (noting that, in order to qualify as an occupational disease, “a plaintiff has to show that his psychological condition, or the aggravation thereof, was (1) ‘due to causes and conditions … Although General Electric may never have directly and explicitly informed plaintiff that it believed he had stolen the missing property, such an accusation was clearly implied in every way.

Chapel Hill Title & Abstract Co. v. Town of Chapel Hill

190 N.C. App. 487 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 20, 2008

The RCD ordinance clearly states that the Board of Adjustment may only grant a variance if it finds “[t]hat the provisions of this article leave an owner no legally reasonable use of the portion of the zoning lot outside … For example, a hardship caused by a restrictive covenant . . . does not qualify the owner for variance consideration.”); Michael B. Brough & Philip P.

Geitner Ex Rel. Southern Hosiery Mills, Inc. v. Mullins

182 N.C. App. 585 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 17, 2007

Martha qualified as executrix of the Estate and opened the estate in the office of the clerk of superior court in Catawba County. The clerk issued letters testamentary. … Stat. § 55-8-31 beyond the clear and unambiguous limits established by the General Assembly. Union Carbide Corp., 351 N.C. at 314 , 526 S.E.2d at 170 . C. Transactions with the Corporation N.C. Gen.