Case law

Blackwelder v. State Department of Human Resources

60 N.C. App. 331 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jan 18, 1983

Qualified Personnel, Inc., 294 N.C. 200, 208 , 240 S.E. 2d 338, 343 (1978). … The right must be one which will clearly be lost or irremediably adversely affected if the order is not reviewable before final judgment.

Robinson v. Halifax Reg'l Med. Ctr.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 21, 2020

Opinion of the Court with Rule 9(j) and there has been no discovery conclusively establishing that Plaintiffs were not reasonable in expecting their Rule 9(j) expert would qualify as an expert at the time they filed … Rather, our review of Rule 9(j) compliance is de novo, because such compliance clearly presents a question of law. Barringer v. Wake Forest Univ. Baptist Med. Ctr., 197 N.C.

Morrison v. Burlington Industries

47 N.C. App. 50 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 3, 1980

Due to the occupational disease suffered by plaintiff, she has no earning capacity in any employment for which she can qualify in the labor market. * * * CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. … In the case subjudice, the Comission’s findings of fact clearly establish the link between plaintiffs occupational disease and her incapacity to work.

White v. Collins Building, Inc.

209 N.C. App. 48 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jan 4, 2011

Defendant, the qualifier for Collins Building on its general contractor’s license and president and sole shareholder of Collins Building, oversaw and personally supervised construction of the residence. … Defendant argued before the trial court, and argues on appeal, that absent facts sufficient to pierce the veil of protection of the corporation, Defendant personally is immune from liability.

Estate of Tallman v. City of Gastonia

200 N.C. App. 13 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 15, 2009

The court nonetheless granted the motion to dismiss “as the Estate file, 07 E 36, clearly shows that no estate existed on December 20, 2006 when application was made in the name of the estate for a 20-day Extension of Time … In addition, as this Court has previously stressed: “It is well established that proceeds from wrongful death actions are not part of a decedent’s estate.” In re Estate of Parrish, 143 N.C.

Beroth Oil Co. v. North Carolina Department of Transportation

220 N.C. App. 419 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 15, 2012

; — though not necessarily the product of a legal error or a clearly erroneous factual finding— cannot be located within the range of permissible decisions.’ ” Blitz v. … These individuals either do not qualify for the Hardship Program, or they do qualify, but are subject to administrative discretion regarding the price at which *430 NCDOT is willing to purchase their property.

Biggs v. Cumberland County Hospital System, Inc.

69 N.C. App. 547 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 3, 1984

Defendant contends the witness was not qualified to testify as an expert in that field and that the court erred in permitting her to do so. We disagree. … This evidence clearly supports the judge’s finding that the witness was qualified to *549 give opinion testimony in the field involved, which, under well established authority, requires that the ruling be affirmed. 1 Brandis

Taylor v. Abernethy

149 N.C. App. 263 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Mar 19, 2002

The trial court made clear that, in its opinion, plaintiff had clearly established Perrotta as well-trained and qualified in the field of handwriting analysis. … However, the trial court stated that its “issue and concern is not that [Perrotta] is trained or qualified.”

Rannbury-Kobee Corp. v. Miller MacHine Co.

49 N.C. App. 413 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 4, 1980

instant case the task was in the area of machine design and manufacture; but in both cases “comments by the able and learned trial judge ... dealt with the very questions which the jury was called upon to decide and were clearly … The absence of a need to qualify Miller as an expert witness makes defendant’s motive questionable and aggravates the harm to plaintiff in having the principal opposition witness declared an expert machinist in the presence

Chapman Ex Rel. Chapman v. Byrd

124 N.C. App. 13 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 1, 1996

Since the alleged statements referred only to “someone” in a group of nine, they clearly do not refer to some, most or all of the group. … Given our disposition of this issue, we do not address defendants’ assertion that they are entitled to qualified immunity on these claims.

State v. Anderson

194 N.C. App. 292 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 16, 2008

On appeal, defendant again asserts that the judge’s statements clearly implied that defendant would face jail time if he did not plead guilty to the charges against him. … David qualified as an expert in computers, a bench conference was held and defendant’s motion was denied. On appeal, defendant argues the trial court erroneously rejected defendant’s motion to qualify Mr.

Whitehurst v. Crisp R v. Center, Inc.

86 N.C. App. 521 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 4, 1987

defective and demanded at that time that the sale be cancelled; defendant Crisp told Whitehurst the problem with the engine might be minor and correctable and that he should have the engine examined by a Chevrolet dealer qualified … establishes as a matter of law that plaintiffs revoked their acceptance of the camper in a timely and effective manner in full compliance with our law.

State v. Beam

70 N.C. App. 181 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 4, 1984

It is well established that an indictment will not be quashed on the ground that testimony before the grand jury given by a qualified witness may have been hearsay and incompetent. State v. … This evidence clearly shows a common scheme and pattern of the defendant to beat patients in order to make them obey him and to show them that he was in charge.

State v. Mather

221 N.C. App. 593 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 17, 2012

. *596 No indictment, whether at common law or under a statute, is sufficient if it does not accurately and clearly allege all of the constituent elements of the crime sought to be charged. … In sum, we are not convinced that the exception is a sufficiently “independent, distinct substantive matter of exemption, immunity or defense, beyond the essentials of the legal definition of the offense itself,” to put all

Fulmore v. Howell

189 N.C. App. 93 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Mar 4, 2008

Social security numbers collected by an agency must be relevant to the purpose for which collected and shall not be collected until and unless the need for social security numbers has been clearly documented. … Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 26(b)(3), “documents prepared in anticipation of litigation are afforded a qualified immunity from discovery by the party seeking those documents.” Cook v. Wake County Hospital System, 125 N.C.

Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Williams

123 N.C. App. 103 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 2, 1996

. § 20-279.21 (b)(3) to establish two classes of insureds for purposes of UIM coverage: “(1) the named insured and, while resident of the same household, the spouse of the named insured and relatives of either and (2) any … However, as indicated above, the policy clearly and unambiguously identified Harvey as the solitary insured.

State v. Terry

207 N.C. App. 311 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 5, 2010

To qualify as a confidential marital communication under N.C. Gen. … New York was cited with approval for the proposition that “to say that a public jail is the equivalent of a man’s ‘house’ *317 or that it is a place where he can claim constitutional immunity from search or seizure ... is

Gilreath v. North Carolina Department of Health & Human Services

177 N.C. App. 499 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 16, 2006

That this practice was followed with respect to the sale of the vehicle to the plaintiffs is confirmed by plaintiff Luther Deleon Moore’s signature, certifying that all warranties were clearly explained to him. … At best, Johnson’s affidavit could be interpreted to find that the missing memos following the facsimile cover page would so qualify, but those documents are not attached in support of the affidavit.

Haarhuis v. Cheek

261 N.C. App. 358 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 18, 2018

Haarhuis's husband, Joris Haarhuis, qualified as administrator of his wife's estate. At the time of the crash, Universal Insurance Company insured defendant's vehicle. … Such a prerogative is immune from our tampering. Fagundes v. Ammons Dev. Grp., Inc. , --- N.C. App. ----, ----, 796 S.E.2d 529 , 533 (2017).

Kempson v. North Carolina Department of Human Resources

100 N.C. App. 482 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 30, 1990

In its interpretation of 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a)(17) and its implementing regulations 42 C.F.R. §§ 435.840-435.852 (1989), the court concluded: We do not agree that this absence clearly precludes a resource spend down. … Moreover, depending on the patient’s condition during the hospitalization, he may not be in a position *488 at the precise moment that the charges equal the spend down amount to pay those medical bills in order to establish