Case law

Fort v. County of Cumberland

218 N.C. App. 401 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 7, 2012

We conclude this evidence was sufficient to establish standing to challenge TigerSwan’s proposed land use. … However, as our Supreme Court has clearly stated, the intent of the drafters of a statute cannot be established in this manner: “Testimony, even by members of the Legislature which adopted the statute, as to its purpose and

In Re SDJ

192 N.C. App. 478 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 2, 2008

It is well established that "`[t]he question of subject matter jurisdiction may be raised at any time, even in the Supreme Court. … When the record clearly shows that subject matter jurisdiction is lacking, the Court will take notice and dismiss the action ex mero motu.'"

Campbell v. North Carolina Department of Transportation—Division of Motor Vehicles

155 N.C. App. 652 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jan 21, 2003

Finding of fact number twenty one and conclusion of law number two further conclude that petitioner failed to establish that she is a “qualified person with a disability.” … Since the accommodations to her workplace would be classified as “reasonable physical changes in the workplace,” petitioner’s evidence established that she is a qualified person with a disability because she could perform

Perry v. Aycock

68 N.C. App. 705 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 5, 1984

They cite no authority for this novel proposition, however; it clearly constitutes an adaptation of the statutory standard of care to the circumstances of the case. … Further, the various estimates of Perry’s speed indicate that it fell far short of speed which, in itself, would qualify as reckless behavior.

Sadler Ex Rel. Sadler v. Purser

12 N.C. App. 206 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 18, 1971

Sadler is designated next friend for the minor plaintiff, he is properly qualified as guardian ad litem for said minor. … established his own contributory negligence as a matter of law that the trial court’s judgment must be sustained.

Munger v. State

202 N.C. App. 404 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 16, 2010

Instead of alleging “that the qualifying criteria operate in a discriminatory manner,” Plaintiffs claim to “have alleged that the creation of a special tax exemption — without regard to the qualifying criteria — is unconstitutional … However, the facts at issue in the two cases are clearly different.

State Ex Rel. Commissioner of Insurance v. North Carolina Rate Bureau

75 N.C. App. 201 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 18, 1985

Here, the Commissioner clearly failed to do this with respect to the reliability of the data. Id. … G.S. § 58-124.19 establishes the standards by which insurance rates must be set.

Etheridge v. Peters

45 N.C. App. 358 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Mar 4, 1980

The Seders decision further established beyond question that a person enjoys no constitutional right to confer with counsel before deciding whether to submit to the breathalyzer test. … Clearly, then, allowing the driver thirty minutes time to decide whether to submit to the test, while providing that he is deemed to have refused at the expiration of the thirty minutes, is a constitutionally sound principle

Tyson v. Henry

133 N.C. App. 415 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 1, 1999

However, the instant instrument can not qualify as an inter vivos trust because the decedent never transferred his property *418 interest to the designated trustee, Taylor. Id. … Our Supreme Court has clearly set forth the requirements for an incorporation by reference in Watson v.

Daniel v. Wray

158 N.C. App. 161 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 3, 2003

Thus, the canons clearly established a form of governance impliedly assented to by defendants that precluded the seceding vestry from taking control of the St. Andrew’s property. III. Despite our conclusion that St. … Andrew’s real property, PECUSA Canon 1.7.4 essentially established a deed of trust.

Expert Discovery

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 20, 2022

A vested right is a right “which is otherwise secured, established, and immune from further legal metamorphosis.” Gardner v. Gardner, 300 N.C. 715, 719, 268 S.E.2d 468, 471 (1980). … “This well- established presumption is grounded in the elementary proposition that the principal function of a legislature is not to make contracts, but to make laws that establish the policy of the

Kashino v. CAROLINA VET. SPEC. MED. SERVS.

650 S.E.2d 839 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 16, 2007

Tultex Corp., 308 N.C. 85, 93-94 , 301 S.E.2d 359, 365 (1983) (in order to establish occupational disease under N.C. … Jemsek nonetheless qualified this opinion on cross-examination: Q. Okay. Dr.

Smith-Price v. Charter Behavioral Health Systems

164 N.C. App. 349 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 18, 2004

Plaintiff’s assignments of error are clearly sufficient. III. … In this case, plaintiff presented no evidence to establish that defendant Laws owed her a duty of care or that he breached such a duty.

Boston v. N.C. Private Protective Services Board

96 N.C. App. 204 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 7, 1989

We note, however, that in its reply brief the Board stated that the petitioner’s experience as a runner did not qualify as private investigative experience. … The Board contends that the “Superior Court cannot substitute its judgment for that of the agency unless the action is so clearly unreasonable as to amount to oppressive and manifest abuse.” State Highway Commission v.

Kelly v. Riley

223 N.C. App. 261 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 6, 2012

If the individual qualifies for a permit based upon the criteria in N.C. Gen. … Stat. § 14-415.18 (a) is only applicable to nonrenewals in the context of establishing the procedure for an appeal to the district court. Moreover, petitioner’s argument completely ignores N.C. Gen.

Rucker v. High Point Memorial Hospital, Inc.

20 N.C. App. 650 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 2, 1974

In a community of this size, with qualified people in it, qualified surgeons in it, if the doctors who serve the community don’t live up to the standards I have described, then they shouldn’t be practicing medicine.” … It appears to us that this clearly creates an employment relationship and not an independent contractor.

State v. Jones

106 N.C. App. 214 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 5, 1992

Stat. § 20-139.1 (d) to have a qualified person *217 of his own choosing administer additional chemical tests, or to have a qualified person withdraw blood for later testing by a person of defendant’s choosing. … App. 567 , 389 S.E.2d 425 , disc, review denied, 326 N.C. 599 , 393 S.E.2d 873 (1990) (procedure established by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-139.1 (d) for obtaining additional chemical tests satisfies due process requirements).

Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Security Building Co.

42 N.C. App. 21 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 19, 1979

The facts known to the witness could have been clearly related to the jury. … The plaintiff’s evidence further tended to reasonably establish that a fire occurred in the area of the ash dump on the following day.

State v. Suitt

167 N.C. App. 808 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jan 4, 2005

Defendant first contends that his conviction and sentence must be vacated because the State did not abide by an agreement promising him immunity in exchange for information regarding other offenses and offenders. … This statute clearly establishes a single wrong; the fraudulent taking of the property of another by a false pretense. "Nowhere does [ N.C. Gen.

State v. Stroud

815 S.E.2d 705 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 1, 2018

Our Supreme Court has held that “[a]n indictment must clearly and positively identify the person charged with the commission of the offense.” State v. … Thus, sufficient evidence was offered at trial to establish Defendant’s participation in a conspiracy to commit robbery with a dangerous weapon.