Case law

State v. Nobles

260 N.C. App. 289 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 3, 2018

The trial court’s unchallenged findings established that individuals designated as first descendants are issued a “Letter of Descent” by the EBCI tribal enrollment office, which is used to establish eligibility for first … Law enforcement clearly and appropriately answered the question posed. Most telling, Det.

North Carolina Department of Correction v. Hodge

99 N.C. App. 602 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 7, 1990

In his effort to establish a prima facie case of discrimination, [Hodge] has shown the following: That he is a member of a protected class/group (minority); that he applied for a position which he qualified for; that the … Thus, [Hodge] has established a prima facie case of racial discrimination. 3.

Holland v. French

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 1, 2020

Donnie George Holland qualified as executor for her estate (“Plaintiff”). … The Tort Claims Act waives sovereign immunity.

State v. Pryor

59 N.C. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 5, 1982

The State’s evidence clearly supports the inference that defendant intended to aid the perpetrators. … linguae,’ nevertheless, the omission is clearly apparent from the record . . . there must be a new trial.”

Davidson County v. City of High Point

85 N.C. App. 26 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 7, 1987

City and county zoning regulations usually do not apply to the State or any of its agencies or political subdivisions unless the *38 Legislature has clearly manifested a contrary intent. McQuillin Mun. … The same zoning restrictions do not apply, however, to the construction, establishment, enlargement, improvement, maintenance, ownership or operation of a public enterprise unless the Legislature has clearly manifested a

Leonard v. Bell

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 4, 2020

Defendants appealed the trial court’s denial of their motion to dismiss based upon public official immunity, and this Court affirmed. … BELL Opinion of the Court Carolina Department of Correction Immunization Record/T.B.

Morris v. Southeastern Orthopedics Sports Medicine

199 N.C. App. 425 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 1, 2009

[establish an appropriate schedule for designating expert witnesses, consistent with a discovery schedule . . .; and [establish by order an appropriate discovery schedule designated so that, unless good cause is *435 shown … Plaintiff’s complaint clearly asserts Rule 9(j) compliance on its face, but “it is also now well established that even when a complaint facially complies with Rule 9(j) by including a statement pursuant to Rule 9(j), if discovery

Lane v. American National Can Co.

181 N.C. App. 527 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 6, 2007

It is well established that work-related depression or other mental illness may qualify as a compensable occupational disease under appropriate circumstances. See, e.g., Smith-Price v. … A review of the records and briefs clearly shows that plaintiffs contentions on appeal only challenge the methodology of Dr.

State v. English

95 N.C. App. 611 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 19, 1989

Such testimony was clearly instructive to the jury. We find no error in its admission. Finally, defendant assigns as error the admission of evidence of an earlier fire in another house. … Such an inference clearly cannot be supported absent a demonstrable nexus between the defendant and the act sought to be introduced against him. No such nexus is present here.

State v. Essick

67 N.C. App. 697 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 17, 1984

While defendants urge that the dismissal of the charges upon a finding of no probable cause is the equivalent of an acquittal, it clearly is not. … Further, Melton’s plea of no contest to lesser related charges clearly does not serve as a judgment of acquittal to the conspiracy charges.

Borden, Inc. v. Wade

21 N.C. App. 205 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 3, 1974

The opinions as to the fair value of the property contained in the documents filed by plaintiffs were not sufficient to establish the fair value as a matter of law and thereby remove that question from consideration by the … We are aware of cases from other jurisdictions holding that uncontra-dicted and unimpeached testimonial evidence from qualified witnesses is sufficient to support summary judgment, even in favor of the party with the burden

John R. Sexton & Co. v. Justus

116 N.C. App. 293 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 6, 1994

Thus, neither the statute nor the relevant caselaw established a rule requiring registration of concentrates before exemption. … Even so, we do not believe that this rule requires the taxpayer to divine a requirement not clearly stated.

McKenzie v. City of High Point

61 N.C. App. 393 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 5, 1983

Third, as the record clearly shows, there was no appeal from the enactment of the earlier ordinance and petitioners’ attempted attack in this appeal is collateral in nature. 1 The evidence before Judge Wood clearly established … We hold that under the foregoing statute, any number of separate qualifying areas may be annexed in a single ordinance.

State v. Gilbert

96 N.C. App. 363 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 21, 1989

Thus, we hold the trial judge’s failure to conduct a voir dire examination to establish her competency was not prejudicial error. … To qualify as hearsay, an out-of-court statement must be offered into evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. North Carolina Rules of Evidence, Rule 801(c).

United Artists Records, Inc. v. Eastern Tape Corp.

19 N.C. App. 207 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 22, 1973

The last two defenses urged by defendants seek to invoke the well established equitable maxim “he who asks equity must do equity.” … To permit him to escape liability under the facts in this case by wrapping around him the cloak of corporate immunity would thwart the ends of justice and is not in the public interest.

Dillingham v. North Carolina Department of Human Resources

132 N.C. App. 704 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 6, 1999

sanction. *707 Irrespective of any reference to “written” documentation, and based solely on the cited Federal regulations, the totality of the evidence and testimony presented supports the essential conclusion that it is not clearly … Transfers Exclusively for a Purpose Other Than to Qualify for Medicaid — -Require the individual to establish, to your satisfaction, that the asset was transferred for a purpose other than to qualify for Medicaid.

Blue v. Mountaire Farms, Inc.

247 N.C. App. 489 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 17, 2016

Have you ever assigned a task to your mechanics that you did not think they were qualified to do? A. No. Q. At any time did Brian Blue or Clifton Swain express to you any concerns about doing this project? A. … However, as discussed above, the record fails to support Plaintiff’s argument that Mountaire Farms employees were clearly incapable of replacing the votator sleeve.

Horne v. Marvin L. Goodson Logging Co.

83 N.C. App. 96 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 21, 1986

Robert Wilfong, qualified as an expert in neurosurgery, testified that plaintiffs neurological examination was normal and that there was no permanent disability to the brain. … It reasonably could be argued that the Deputy Commissioner clearly considered this testimony, found it to be incredible, and simply chose not to believe it. However, since it was error to characterize Dr.

Snuggs v. STANLY CTY. DEPT. OF PUBLIC HEALTH

303 S.E.2d 646 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 5, 1983

It is well established that State courts have concurrent general subject matter jurisdiction to hear Section 1983 claims. In Martinez v. … Presnell , a remarkably analogous case, clearly holds to the long-established North Carolina rule that "where the legislature has provided by statute an effective administrative remedy, that remedy is exclusive and its relief

Combs v. City Electric Supply Co.

203 N.C. App. 75 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Mar 16, 2010

Smith, 289 N.C. at 87 , 221 S.E.2d 292 . “ ‘[N]on-outsiders’ often enjoy qualified immunity from liability for inducing their corporation or other entity to breach its contract with an employee.... … In order to establish a prima facie claim under N.C. Gen.