Case law

Haley v. ABB, Inc.

174 N.C. App. 469 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 15, 2005

“[FJindings 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. Vogler, 152 N.C. … The assignment of error must clearly disclose the question presented.

State v. Lenoir

259 N.C. App. 857 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 5, 2018

However, in cases where a defendant fails to preserve for appellate review an issue relating to the suppression of evidence we conduct plain error review if the defendant specifically and clearly makes a plain error argument … In addition, the affidavit did not explain how Sergeant Murray was qualified to distinguish between a pipe being used for lawful — as opposed to unlawful — purposes.

State v. Dixon

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 5, 2023

And do your -- again, you have some clearly heart-felt personal feelings about the death penalty. … Despite these similarities, there was more reason for the State to doubt M.K.’s ability to serve as a death-qualified juror than R.D.

Thrash v. City of Asheville

95 N.C. App. 457 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 19, 1989

II Burden of Proof Before addressing these and other issues, we note that an annexation ordinance before the Court which recites compliance with all applicable statutory provisions establishes prima facie substantial compliance … We hold that a water and sewer district is a municipal corporation organized for a special purpose which does not qualify as a municipal corporation for purposes of Chapter 160A.

North Carolina Forestry Ass'n v. North Carolina Department of Environment & Natural Resources

162 N.C. App. 467 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 3, 2004

The Congress of the United States authorized the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) to establish effluent limitations for pollutants and toxic waste discharges by industry, agricultural operations, and public and private … We vacate and remand the remainder of the order to the superior court to: (1) characterize the remaining issues before the court, (2) clearly delineate the standard of review used, (3) resolve each motion or issue raised

Walker v. North Carolina Coastal Resources Commission

124 N.C. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 1, 1996

Ed. 2d at 507 (“fact that one other court agreed or disagreed with the Government does not establish whether its position was substantially justified”); United States v. … Rather than refusing a permit absent Oriental’s obtaining a DOA easement, CRC granted same notwithstanding law and regulations which *10 “clearly indicate[d],” Walker, 111 N.C.

State v. Lebedev

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 7, 2023

In keeping with our well- established principles of statutory interpretation, we conclude that the term “dismissal” is an unambiguous word that “has a definite and well known sense in the law.” Fid. Bank v. N.C. … App. 665, 668-69, 401 S.E.2d 118, 121 (1991) (holding that because “[t]he record clearly shows that the State’s request for a dismissal on the charge of first degree murder was predicated on its request for a charge of

In re Proceedings for Condemnation of a Fee Simple Interest in Land Owned by Lee

69 N.C. App. 277 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 3, 1984

The court accepted Gelder as an expert in the area of sand and gravel mining operations and in the area of the economic feasibility of establishing a mining operation. … First of all, the record shows the questions propounded by the court to have been straightforward and clearly asked for the purposes of clarification.

Skinner v. North Carolina Department of Correction

154 N.C. App. 270 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 3, 2002

There was clearly substantial evidence to support this finding. … Plaintiff asserts in the present case that he established a prima facie case by demonstrating that he is an African-American man and was qualified for his position as a food service supervisor.

Church v. MADISON COUNTY BD. OF EDUCATION

31 N.C. App. 641 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 15, 1976

Plaintiff's complaint clearly reveals that, until the time this lawsuit was instituted, she had proceeded under the Tenure Act. … Legislation of the type outlined by G.S. 115-142 has become necessary in many fields where matters of regulation and control may, and must, be handled by appropriate commissions and agencies that are particularly qualified

Stowe v. Stowe

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 7, 2020

Patton, 318 N.C. 404, 406, 348 S.E.2d 593, 595 (1986) (“the trial court should make specific findings regarding the value of a spouse’s professional practice and the existence and value of its goodwill, and should clearly … He was qualified as a CPA. He’s not establishing appropriate methodology. And based on [N.C. Gen.

State v. Lewis

166 N.C. App. 596 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 19, 2004

Testimonial Evidence The decision in Crawford refused to define exactly what qualifies as testimonial evidence. … In this case, this evidence was offered to establish the truth of the matter asserted, i.e., the identity of the assailant.

Pulte Home Corp. v. American Southern Insurance

185 N.C. App. 162 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 7, 2007

Given the absence of similar qualifying language in this case, St. … When asked in interrogatories to identify any facts on which American Southern relied to establish the defense of untimely notification, American Southern stated only: “The facts are laid out clearly in the June 10, 2003

Handex of the Carolinas, Inc. v. County of Haywood

168 N.C. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jan 18, 2005

Lapsley to rebut any expert or other evidence Handex might have called to establish the relevant standard of care and breach thereof. During Handex’s examination, it was established that Mr. … Put differently, the word “discretion” qualifies the word “allowed,” not the word “costs.” We then held that costs, as intended by the legislature to be used in N.C. Gen.

Hampton v. Cumberland Cty.

256 N.C. App. 656 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 5, 2017

Stat. § 153A-340(b)(2), as only generally establishing a property is a bona fide farm. … Conclusion "Zoning regulations are in derogation of common law rights and they cannot be construed to include or exclude by implication that which *694 is not clearly [within] their express terms.

State v. Bethea

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 3, 2017

At the hearing on 31 October 2016, Petitioner did not contest his prior offenses qualified him as a tier II offender under SORNA. … The statute clearly states that upon a finding that a petitioner does not have a dis-qualifying arrest and is not ineligible for relief under federal law, a trial court is required to find a petitioner is not otherwise

State v. Philip Morris USA Inc.

194 N.C. App. 255 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 16, 2008

The court would allow a Tax Offset Adjustment even if the government never collects the assessments due under a qualifying change of law and hence never spends them for the benefit of tobacco farmers. … There is no ambiguity as to the Trust Agreement's purpose or the parties' intentions; our Supreme Court has clearly set out both.

State v. Phachoumphone

257 N.C. App. 848 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 6, 2018

PHACHOUMPHONE Opinion of the Court clearly. . . .” … We explained: [T]his type of finding of fact is one that the trial court is particularly well-qualified to make, and one that we are not well-qualified to question.

Cater v. Barker

172 N.C. App. 441 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 16, 2005

Standard of Review Our review of a trial court’s grant of summary judgment is well-established. … “The party moving for summary judgment has the burden of establishing the lack of any triable issue.” Collingwood v. G.E.

In re Hatley

30 N.C. App. 413 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 18, 1976

[T]he mere establishment of a mental problem is not an adequate basis upon which to confine a person who has never harmed or attempted to harm either himself or another. … of qualified psychiatrists, is a determination which properly can be made by the State.”