Case law

Martin v. Hare

78 N.C. App. 358 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 17, 1985

It is well established that, “A party cannot be silent while a witness is testifying, as a qualified expert, to matters of opinion which are material to the controversy, and, after he has so testified, object generally to … The facts of this case clearly establish a prima facie case of bailment.

Danjee, Inc. v. Addressograph Multigraph Corp.

44 N.C. App. 626 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 5, 1980

Defendant’s evidence tended to show that it committed to a normal twelve-week delivery on the 797 but had qualified it by stating that it would provide a loaner if for any reason delivery was impossible. … establishing the amount with reasonable certainty.

State v. Jones

63 N.C. App. 411 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 2, 1983

Moreover, it is unlikely that Rector was more qualified than the jury to reach that conclusion. … Clearly the trial judge did not err in denying defendant’s motion to dismiss. Defendant’s ninth assignment of error is that the trial court erred in charging the jury on manslaughter.

State v. Mills

221 N.C. App. 409 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 19, 2012

We remanded the case after finding that the evidence established the manner of use of the weapon, but did not establish the defendant’s size or condition compared to that of the victim. Id. … Defendant contends that this testimony was neither rationally based nor helpful to the jury, arguing that these opinions were inadmissible because the detectives were not qualified as experts in this area.

Pine Knoll Association, Inc. v. Cardon

126 N.C. App. 155 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 6, 1997

Likewise, the evidence before the trial court clearly establishes that defendant is a property owner within Pine Knoll Shores, and therefore is a member of plaintiff Association. … A riparian owner has “a qualified property in the water frontage belonging, by nature, to their land, the chief advantage growing out of the appurtenant estate in the submerged land being the right of access over an extension

State v. Lawrence

170 N.C. App. 200 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 17, 2005

As our case law clearly holds, where the jury found sexual conduct which constitutes an immoral, improper or indecent act, such is sufficient for a unanimous verdict of the whole jury. … App. 583 , 589 S.E.2d 402 (2003) (holding where the number of qualifying incidents testified to by the victim at trial was the same as the number of qualifying incidents on the verdict sheets submitted, there was no danger

Danaher v. Joffe

184 N.C. App. 642 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 17, 2007

Clearly, their living arrangements would not be the functional equivalent of a family unit. … I believe the combination of these two factors is sufficient to establish that a group of unrelated individuals constitutes a "single housekeeping unit" or is "substantively structured as an integrated family unit," such

In Re the Will of Johnston

157 N.C. App. 258 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 15, 2003

Moreover, it is well established that orders regarding discovery matters are within the discretion of the trial court and will not be upset on appeal absent a showing of abuse of discretion. Belcher v. … Absent evidence in the record, we cannot determine whether or not any information possessed by Rountree was highly material to caveators’ case or otherwise immune from discovery. See N.C. Farm Bureau Mutual Ins. Co. v.

Arquilla v. City of Salisbury

136 N.C. App. 24 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 21, 1999

To establish non-compliance with N.C. Gen. … Clearly, Lot 24 was not supporting governmental use if the County sought to sell it.

Texfi Industries, Inc. v. City of Fayetteville

44 N.C. App. 268 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 18, 1979

Such a potential result would clearly be in contravention of the principle that “a State may not dilute a person’s vote to give weight to other in *273 terests.” Evans v. … Under North Carolina law, property interests alone cannot establish voting rights.

Majebe v. North Carolina Board of Medical Examiners

106 N.C. App. 253 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 19, 1992

any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen pf the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities … This is equivalent to the position that until all murderers, robbers, and other criminals have been convicted and punished, the remainder, even though their guilt is clearly established, should not be either.

In re: A.P.

260 N.C. App. 540 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 7, 2018

The ICWA was enacted by Congress in 1978 to establish the “minimum Federal standards for the removal of Indian children from their families and the placement of such children in foster or adoptive homes” in order to “protect … The federal regulations implementing ICWA and promulgated in 2016, clearly the states court has reason to know an “Indian child” is involved if: “Any participant in the proceeding, officer of the court involved in the

State v. Torres

99 N.C. App. 364 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 17, 1990

Clearly, as the pathologist who performed the autopsy of the victim, Dr. … He, in essence, is asking the court to find that “the evidence so clearly establishes the fact in issue that no reasonable inferences to the contrary can be drawn.” State v.

Austin v. CONTINENTAL GENERAL TIRE

185 N.C. App. 488 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 21, 2007

Thus, plaintiff’s disability was clearly at issue on remand. Moreover, recent opinions of this Court addressing this situation clearly contemplate an eviden- *493 tiary hearing on remand. See, e.g., Abernathy v. … Defendant cites no authority for the proposition that a claimant cannot recover for an occupational disease if he has voluntarily retired prior to filing a claim, and long-established precedent to the contrary clearly establishes

In re Appeal of McLamb

218 N.C. App. 485 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 7, 2012

Respondent argues that the County’s present-use value meets the appraisal standards established by N.C. Gen. … However, as the above statutes and the portions of the manual clearly note, the manual merely gives “recommendations” to counties regarding their present-use valuation.

State v. Cooper

229 N.C. App. 442 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 3, 2013

Ward is the appropriate and qualified witness. … Evidence challenging the State’s presentation of that evidence would have clearly been a “significant factor” in Defendant’s defense.

State v. Benjamin

83 N.C. App. 318 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 18, 1986

G.S. 8C-1, Rule 702 states: If scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, … In the present case all the evidence established that the defendant and the victim were alone in the defendant’s home at the time of the shooting.

State v. Palmiter

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 6, 2026

“To qualify for the Fifth Amendment privilege, a communication must be testimonial, incriminating, and compelled.” Id. … Through its case law distinguishing between laws that unconstitutionally compel self-incrimination and constitutional regulatory laws, the Supreme Court has established several relevant considerations including the policy

Coucoulas/Knight Properties, LLC v. Town of Hillsborough

199 N.C. App. 455 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 1, 2009

This clearly falls within the ESU district requirement. Further, the Zoning Ordinance requires that projects be a minimum of 2 acres to qualify for ESU district zoning. Plaintiffs property is 2.16 acres. … Thus, based on the plain language of the Zoning Ordinance, in order to qualify for ESU district zoning, a property must be located on a road that leads into Town.

State v. Treadway

208 N.C. App. 286 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 7, 2010

Accordingly, Lane’s statements were intended to establish why investigative action was originally taken, not to prove that defendant engaged in the conduct alleged. … Even assuming error, defendant has not shown any prejudice where the jury clearly deliberated each charge separately. We find no error, much less plain error, in the trial court’s jury instructions. IV.