Case law

Practice v. N.C. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., & Computer Scis. Corp.

250 N.C. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 18, 2016

Thus, the pertinent NCAC regulation clearly anticipates that a provider may choose not to pursue a reconsideration review. 2. … They do not contain any language indicating that the claims decisions contained in the statements are "final" adjudications or qualify as "final notifications," within the regulatory language set forth above.

Lippard v. Holleman

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 19, 2020

HOLLEMAN Opinion of the Court “The Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment prohibit any ‘law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting … Lippard]’s actions been clearly demonstrated to her and to you as wrong according to the Scriptures? [2].

In Re the Estate of Parrish

143 N.C. App. 244 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 1, 2001

Like the Sturman heirs, the beneficiaries, also legatees under Parrish’s will, clearly had an interest in the wrongful death proceeds, see Below, 12 N.C. … Despite this well-established principle, White is not entitled to a presumption of acting in good faith.

York v. Northern Hospital District of Surry County

88 N.C. App. 183 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 22, 1987

Olinger qualified to testify as an expert. We find no abuse of discretion in the court’s ruling with respect to the testimony of Dr. Olinger. … The mere fact that the textbook was used in Surry Community College does not establish its relevance.

Department of Transportation v. Charlotte Area Manufactured Housing, Inc.

160 N.C. App. 461 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 7, 2003

Put differently, the word “discretion” qualifies the word “allowed,” not the word “costs.” Thus, N.C.G.S. § 6-20, read closely and in context, is not strong authority for a trial court to tax non-7A-305(d) costs. … We conclude that our duty is to follow the rule established by the Supreme Court in McNeely and this Court’s “explicitly delineated” cases, which generally adhere to that rule.

Reichhold Chemicals, Inc. v. Goel

146 N.C. App. 137 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 18, 2001

“The privilege [to interfere with a contractual relationship] is conditional or qualified; that is, it is lost if exercised for a wrong purpose. … We hold that those actions alone are insufficient to qualify as unfair trade practices under N.C.G.S. § 75-1.1.

Norman Owen Trucking, Inc. v. Morkoski

131 N.C. App. 168 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 20, 1998

We are not prepared to establish a rule that a corporation, even closely held, may not make regular salary payments if faced with debt in excess of cash on hand. … Simple breach of contract or failure to pay a debt do not qualify as unfair or deceptive acts, but rather must be characterized by some type of egregious or aggravating circumstances before the statute applies.

Point S. Props., LLC v. Cape Fear Pub. Util. Auth.

243 N.C. App. 508 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 20, 2015

Accordingly, the cases cited by defendants are clearly distinguishable from the instant case. We conclude that plaintiffs' claims are not based upon defendants' alleged breach of a duty or liability established by N.C. … Gen.Stat. § 153A-4, which states that: *524 It is the policy of the General Assembly that the counties of this State should have adequate authority to exercise the powers, rights, duties, functions, privileges, and immunities

State v. Perkins

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 18, 2022

not qualify as punishment then it cannot be a sentence. … Because I would hold that the 2020 SBM orders did qualify as part of  STATE V.

State v. Perkins

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 18, 2022

not qualify as punishment then it cannot be a sentence. … Because I would hold that the 2020 SBM orders did qualify as part of  STATE V.

WOODLIFF v. Fitzpatrick

205 N.C. App. 192 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 6, 2010

However, it is well established that “the rule of liberal construction cannot be extended beyond the clearly expressed language of the [A]ct,” Gilmore v. … Plaintiff also presented insufficient evidence that the named individuals were similarly situated to him, or that they worked pursuant to Defendant’s control based on other facts, in order to demonstrate that they even qualified

M.E. v. T.J.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 31, 2020

That form of causation is established whenever a particular outcome would not have happened “but for” the purported cause. … Although in Bostock the Court was construing a statute, its definitions and analysis are relevant to due process and equal protection claims, in that it holds the definition of “sex,” absent any qualifying language, includes

RL Regi North Carolina, LLC v. Lighthouse Cove, LLC

229 N.C. App. 71 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 20, 2013

’s standards of *75 creditworthiness, the creditor may require the signature of the other person only on the instrument(s) necessary ... to enable the creditor to reach the property being relied upon [by the creditor to establish … The trial court clearly differentiates between a creditor requesting a spousal guaranty, which is allowed under subsection (5), and requiring a spousal guaranty, which is prohibited under subsection (5).

State v. Cook

254 N.C. App. 150 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 20, 2017

Had the jury been properly instructed according to North Carolina General Statute § 14-51.2, they could have decided whether the State had overcome the rebuttable presumption established by the statute. … If the castle doctrine and the law of self-defense are not both reconciled and clearly distinguished we end up with this nonsensical result-a person asleep in his own home is awakened by an intruder attempting to enter his

Winkler v. State Bd. of Examiners of Plumbing

249 N.C. App. 578 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 20, 2016

Thus, the question here is whether his actions as to the pool heater fall within Article 2’s authorization of disciplinary action, as it clearly exempts - 22 -  WINKLER V … The foregoing evidence, particularly Findings of Fact numbers 9, 10, and 16 through 26 establish incompetence and violations of 87-23.

State v. Gilbert

264 N.C. App. 250 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Mar 5, 2019

Smurro testified in exchange for immunity for her actions from prosecution. As PTA treasurer, it was her responsibility to maintain the checkbook and keep financial records. … Rule of Evidence 704 "allows admission of lay opinion evidence on ultimate issues, but to qualify for admission the opinion must be helpful to the jury." Mobley v. Hill, 80 N.C.

Baccus v. N.C. Department of Crime Control & Public Safety

195 N.C. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jan 20, 2009

[S]uch liberality should not, however, extend beyond the clearly expressed language of those provisions, and our courts may not enlarge the ordinary meaning of the terms used by the legislature or engage in any method of … Regardless of this ambiguity, however, chapter 127A, article 8, which is entitled “Pay of Militia,” clearly indicates that when a North Carolina National Guard member is called or ordered into state service, he or she is:

Mark IV Beverage, Inc. v. Molson Breweries USA, Inc.

129 N.C. App. 476 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 19, 1998

As the Maine Supreme Judicial Court has made clear, ‘We shall accept the agency’s construction, especially if, as here, it is long established . . . unless it clearly violates the legislative intent.’ … Nevertheless, “freedom of contract is a qualified and not an absolute right.” Morris v. Holshouser, 220 N.C. 293, 296 , 17 S.E.2d 115, 117 (1941).

Hamilton v. MORTGAGE INFORMATION SERVICES, INC.

212 N.C. App. 73 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 17, 2011

Qualified Personnel, Inc., 294 N.C. 200, 210 , 240 S.E.2d 338, 344 (1978)). … Claims According to clearly-established North Carolina law, a party’s preference for having all related claims determined during the course of a single proceeding does not rise to the level of a substantial right.

In re: Chastain

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 1, 2022

Article IV establishes our judicial branch, including the office of Clerk in each county. … has established a procedure whereby our Supreme Court may also “suspend” and “public[ly] reprimand” a judge.