Case law

Osborne v. Yadkin Valley Econ. Dev. Dist. Inc.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 7, 2021

“Section 1983 imposes liability on state actors who cause the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution. … In this case, because transporting students to school does not qualify as an ultrahazardous or inherently dangerous activity, the exception does not apply.

State v. Boyd

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 5, 2025

However, the trial court qualified that finding by also stating that it “[would] rule in the alternative as well considering the other factors.” … App. 927, 810 S.E.2d 389 (2018) (Wilkerson II), misconstrue this well-established precedent.

In re: J.H.

244 N.C. App. 255 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 1, 2015

Respondent-mother appeals from a permanency planning order which established a permanent plan for guardianship for her son J.H. (“James”)1 and appointed his maternal grandparents as guardians. … Stat. § 50A-203 Since the Texas court’s entry of an initial child-custody determination as to James, “any change to that [Texas] order qualifies as a modification under the UCCJEA.”

Cannon v. Miller

71 N.C. App. 460 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 4, 1984

The party moving for summary judgment has the burden of clearly establishing the lack of any triable issue of fact by the record properly before the court; his papers are to be carefully scrutinized and those of the opposing … The defendant’s evidentiary forecast clearly controverted these factual allegations, but it did not establish the lack of genuine love and affection between the Cannons as a matter of law.

Clarke, ex rel v. Mikhail

243 N.C. App. 677 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 3, 2015

Long-established North Carolina case law and the Pattern Jury Instructions clearly state “[t]he doctrine of insulating negligence is an elaboration of a phase of proximate cause.” Childers v. … Stat. § 28A-18-2(c) (2013) (“All evidence which reasonably tends to establish any of the elements of damages . . . or otherwise reasonably tends to establish the present - 24 -

Byrd v. Lowe's Home Ctrs., Inc.

809 S.E.2d 921 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 20, 2018

In the present case, as in Bryant , the Commission's findings clearly demonstrate it gave proper consideration to Dr. McCloskey's testimony. See Pittman v. International Paper Co. , 132 N.C. … McCloskey's testimony established the requisite element of causation "between the 16 May 2013 incident at work and [ ] Plaintiff's resulting disability." We disagree.

Ingle v. Ingle

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 4, 2014

Thus, the order that has been presented for our review in this case is clearly interlocutory in nature. … Qualified Personnel, Inc., 294 N.C. 200, 207, 240 S.E.2d 338, 343 (1978), and City of Raleigh v. Edwards, 234 N.C. 528, 529, 67 S.E.2d 669, 671 (1951)).

Griffin v. Absolute Fire Control

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jan 7, 2020

[because] [w]ages paid by an injured employee out of sympathy, or in consideration of his long service with the employer, clearly do not reflect his actual earning capacity[]”); Id. … The majority’s opinion unlawfully purports to shift and place a burden upon Defendant to prove competitive jobs exist in the market for which Plaintiff is qualified and can physically accomplish.

State v. Lawrence

165 N.C. App. 548 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 3, 2004

The element of force may be established by evidence of constructive force: Constructive force, applied through fear, fright, or coercion, suffices to establish the element of force in second-degree rape. … However, even if we consider certain of the defendant’s actions to comprise a continuous single offense (e.g., pouring wine into C.L.’s vagina, and then performing oral sex) the evidence clearly showed more than one separate

State v. Giddens

199 N.C. App. 115 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 18, 2009

In the present case, however, Kent's testimony was clearly improper, as she testified that DSS had concluded Defendant was guilty of the alleged criminal acts. … Kent testified that when interviewing children she uses a forensic model that does not lead the child, and she establishes that the child knows the difference between a truth and a lie.

Cinema I Video, Inc. v. Thornburg

83 N.C. App. 544 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 30, 1986

Whatever the scope of the ‘right to receive’ referred to in Stanley, it is not so broad as to immunize the dealings in obscenity in which Reidel engaged here — dealings that Roth held unprotected by the First Amendment. … Clearly, G.S. 14-190.16 repeatedly refers to live performances, which in turn would require a live minor.

Barron v. Eastpointe Human Servs. Lme

246 N.C. App. 364 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 5, 2016

Barron did not establish that his due process rights were violated during the investigation. Mr. … Barron “was clearly notified of - 31 -  BARRON V.

First Atlantic Management, Corp. v. Dunlea Realty, Co.

131 N.C. App. 242 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 3, 1998

A right is substantial “only when it ‘will clearly be lost or irremediably adversely affected if the order is not reviewable before final judgment.’ ” Brown v. Brown, 77 N.C. … First, the right in question must qualify as “substantial,” and second, enforcement of that right, absent immediate appeal, must be “lost, prejudiced or be less than adequately protected by exception to entry of the interlocutory

Wing v. Wachovia Bank & Trust Co.

44 N.C. App. 402 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jan 8, 1980

Clearly in this case there is a time limitation. We do not make as much of the failure to make further distribution in the case of this will as we would in that of a person not of testator’s profession. … Testator provided for increase to the class of great nieces and great nephews receiving income from the trust within the limits of the rule against perpetuities but established no survivor-ship requirement. Wing v.

State v. Perry

229 N.C. App. 304 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 20, 2013

In urging us to reach a different result, Defendant argues, among other things, that the record evidence fails to conclusively establish his guilt. … However, the evidence presented in this case by the State, which the jury clearly believed, tended to show that Defendant intentionally inflicted a number of severe and traumatic injuries to the head and body of a previously

State v. Stokes

150 N.C. App. 211 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 21, 2002

Lantz testified that he had performed about 2,000 autopsies over his career and had, in other cases, been qualified as an expert on battered child syndrome. … We held that the officer's testimony "clearly establishes that defendant initiated the conversation which led to his inculpatory statements," and therefore, "[d]efendant did not make the inculpatory statements in the context

City of Roanoke Rapids v. Halifax Cnty.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 1, 2025

That [d]efendant is not entitled to a defense of sovereign immunity because by attempting to force the [p]laintiff to pay for municipal dispatching services, [d]efendant is acting … town, special district, or other unit of local government to levy taxes on property, except for purposes authorized by general law uniformly applicable throughout the State, unless the tax is approved by a majority of the qualified

Fields v. Fields

242 N.C. App. 521 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 4, 2015

Subsequently, Gloria qualified as administrator of Phillip's estate and the trial court substituted Gloria, as the real party in interest as personal representative of Phillip's estate, for Ebony. … We are, of course, bound by the Supreme Court's construction of Lockwood , and Lockwood , therefore, cannot establish that plaintiff's evidence is sufficient to establish causation.

State v. Corbett/Martens

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 4, 2020

I do not remember clearly after that. … Yet, James’s analysis of the challenged evidence clearly contravened the reliability protocol established in his own treatise.

In re the Foreclosure of a North Carolina Deed of Trust

236 N.C. App. 544 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 7, 2014

Accordingly, Judge Leonard found that the trustee established the existence of a “bona fide dispute” regarding the validity of DAN’s liens. … Clearly, DAN is squarely within the requisite time frame in which it can bring its foreclosure action. We overrule respondents’ argument. II.