Case law

Eluhu v. Rosenhaus

159 N.C. App. 355 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 5, 2003

Eluhu, several of which either contain no reference to place or time or do not qualify as evidentiary statements as they are based only "upon information and belief." See Tompkins v. … This Court noted the minimal requirements established by the federal courts, and held these contacts were sufficient to satisfy due process. Id. at 734-35, 537 S.E.2d at 858 (citing Brown v.

State v. Betts

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 3, 2019

McSwain and Masola were qualified as expert witnesses. … Defendant argues the “trial court plainly erred because the opinions and recommendations in the [McSwain Report] clearly establish McSwain found M.C. and her sexual abuse allegations credible and believed in [Defendant’

King v. Windsor Capital Group, Inc.

178 N.C. App. 669 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 1, 2006

Further, the record establishes — and plaintiff does not seriously dispute — that she performed management functions. … According to the First Circuit, a focus on the percentage of time “seems better directed at situations where the employee’s management and non-management functions are more clearly severable than they are here.” Id.

State v. Duncan

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jan 17, 2023

While “[i]t is a well- established principle that an officer may make a warrantless arrest for a misdemeanor committed in his or her presence[,]” State v. … It clearly states that an infraction shall be deemed the equivalent of operating a motor vehicle without any driver’s license.” We find no such clear statement in the plain text of § 20-29.1.

The N. Carolina State Bar v. Britt

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 1, 2015

Defendant then questioned whether Norman looked for evidence of embezzlement or fraud in his review of the trust account and the State Bar objected on the basis that “[defendant] hasn’t established [Norman] is qualified … In order to qualify Norman as an expert, defendant questioned Norman further on his background.

In re: The McClatchy Co.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 20, 2022

The statute speaks clearly: it requires the trial court to consider eight factors and allows it to consider any additional factors of its own making. … Indeed, subsection (g) clearly states that the trial court is permitted, and not required, to “place any conditions or restriction on the release” that it, “in its discretion, deems appropriate.” Id.

State v. Grant

178 N.C. App. 565 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 1, 2006

Our Court held that the sawed-off shotgun "was not connected to the robbery and it was clearly not relevant to any issues in the case." Id. … The evidence was also relevant to establish defendant's motive for shooting the victim because defendant did not want the victim to discover that defendant was violating his probation by possessing firearms.

State v. Duncan

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jan 17, 2023

While “[i]t is a well- established principle that an officer may make a warrantless arrest for a misdemeanor committed in his or her presence[,]” State v. … It clearly states that an infraction shall be deemed the equivalent of operating a motor vehicle without any driver’s license.” We find no such clear statement in the plain text of § 20-29.1.

State v. Waycaster

260 N.C. App. 684 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 7, 2018

WAYCASTER Opinion of the Court the memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, all as shown by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified … Wall stated that: The statute at issue in the instant case, section 14-7.4, clearly indicates that the provision is permissive, not mandatory, in that it provides a prior conviction

McKinnon v. CV INDUSTRIES, INC.

213 N.C. App. 328 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 19, 2011

Indirect competition is just as important and clearly acknowledged within the industry since in both in [sic] the fabric industry and the furniture industry, the producer is ultimately seeking to obtain a larger customer … While an instance of fraud may qualify as an unfair method of competition under section 75-1.1, Plaintiff has presented no evidence to support his fraud claim.

Wyer v. Alamance Reg'l Med. Ctr.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 18, 2026

Lamont Wyer (“Lamont”) were qualified as administrators of Mr. Wyer’s estate. … Wyer and Benita “clearly expressed a desire for full medical intervention.” They cite two forms to this effect, dated 5 April 2018 and 11 May 2018, and the notes recorded by Dr.

Mission Hospitals, Inc. v. North Carolina Department of Health & Human Services

205 N.C. App. 35 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 6, 2010

AHO clearly specified in its letter which costs were attributed to each project and which costs were attributed to the developer’s base costs. … The Agency did not ultimately decide whether the estimate provided by AHO’s architect qualified as a certified cost estimate under this section, because the Agency found that the evidence established that the. actual construction

In The Matter Of The Foreclosure Of: L.L. Murphrey Co.

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.

State v. Butler

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Mar 18, 2026

Additionally, the evidence clearly showed Nicole, not Defendant, was driving the truck when it ran over Tim’s leg, and the jury was instructed to consider only injuries “that the Defendant inflicted.” … Accordingly, “A person who uses force as permitted by this section is justified in using such force and is immune from civil or criminal liability for the use of such force[.]” Id. § 14-51.2(e).

State v. Courtney

259 N.C. App. 635 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 15, 2018

But in return for agreeing to testify at defendant’s trial, the State dropped the charge against Moses and granted him immunity. … Ct. at 1075 (explaining that a judicial “ ‘acquittal’ includes ‘a ruling by the court that the evidence is insufficient to convict,’ a ‘factual finding that necessarily establishes the criminal defendant’s lack of criminal

State v. Davis

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 17, 2025

Defendant had only one prior reportable conviction that qualified him as much. … App. 430, 431, 896 S.E.2d 430, 152 (2023).12 Our Supreme Court has clearly instructed that “for a party to meet its burden of establishing substantial similarity of an out-of-state offense to a North Carolina offense by

State v. Crabtree

249 N.C. App. 395 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 6, 2016

Further, the same analysis applies to a witness who is a DSS worker or child abuse investigator because, even if she is “not qualified as an expert witness, . . . the jury [will] most likely [give] her opinion more weight … The observations of the grandmother and brother are helpful but they do not constitute a first degree sex offense although they clearly provide sufficient evidence to sustain the indecent liberties charges.

State v. Baungartner

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 6, 2020

record of [Defendant] and his stipulation that he qualifies for habitual felon status with three prior DWIs, the court will arrest judgment on the underlying DWI and will sentence [Defendant] at the bottom of the presumptive … Friend, where this Court expressly and clearly held: “before entering money judgments against indigent defendants for fees imposed by their court-appointed counsel under N.C. Gen.

State v. Graham

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Mar 17, 2020

Our Supreme Court held that: [The victim’s] testimony clearly indicated a course of continuing sexual abuse by the defendant. … Code Ann. § 16-6-3 but does not constitute an offense, or only qualifies as a Class C felony, under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-27.25.

J & B Slurry Seal Co. v. Mid-South Aviation, Inc.

88 N.C. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 15, 1987

Qualified Personnel, Inc., 294 N.C. 200, 207 , 240 S.E.2d 338, 343 (1978) (stating both Section 1-277 and Section 7A-27 "in effect provide that no appeal" of "interlocutory" orders allowed unless substantial right affected … As we question the compatibility of the Oestreicher/Nasco analysis with Veazey, Green and Bernick , we adopt the latter decisions' longer established, and more recently affirmed, rationale and conclude that the possibility