Case law

State v. Brown

59 N.C. App. 411 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 16, 1982

It is well established that a trial judge may question witnesses as long as the judge does not violate the prohibition against expressing an opinion as to the weight of the evidence or the credibility of the witness. 1 Brandis … Questions 1, 2, 3, and 5 began with the qualifying language “where do you say,” “when you say,” and “you say.” That language clearly precludes any interpretation of the judge’s questions as an expression of his opinion.

Wells v. Cumberland County Hospital System, Inc.

150 N.C. App. 584 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 4, 2002

The record clearly indicates that CCHS was created on 13 June 1969, when Highsmith-Rainey Memorial Hospital, Inc., and Cape Fear Valley Hospital, Inc., filed Articles of Merger with the Secretary of State and merged into … Therefore, we conclude CCHS qualifies as a “public officer” under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-77 (2), and venue was properly changed from Robeson County to Cumberland County.

Warren v. North Carolina Department of Crime Control & Public Safety

221 N.C. App. 376 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 19, 2012

This determination by the AU was categorized as a conclusion of law but was clearly a factual determination. Therefore, we treat it as such. See Peters v. Pennington, - N.C. … Unacceptable personal conduct does not necessarily establish just cause for all types of discipline.

State v. Smith

33 N.C. App. 511 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 6, 1977

Any error in admission of this testimony was clearly not prejudicial. This assignment of error is overruled. … This presumption is not a statutory presumption, but is a rule of evidence, established by the courts for the protection of married women at a time when they could not testify for themselves.

Cates v. Wilson

83 N.C. App. 448 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 16, 1986

The privilege established by G.S. § 8-53 is not absolute, but qualified. Sims, supra. … As under the qualified statutory protection established by G.S. § 8-53 for confidential information, the trial court should be able to permit plaintiffs’ treating physicians to give expert opinion testimony on liability if

Wright v. American General Life Insurance

59 N.C. App. 591 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 7, 1982

While the record does not clearly establish that the witness in question resides in Virginia, it contains indications that he does, and it presents no evidence to the contrary. … Hospital records are properly admitted as exceptions to the hearsay rule when they qualify as entries in the regular course of *596 business. E.g., Sims v. Insurance Co., 257 N.C. 32, 35, 125 S.E. 2d 326, 328-29 (1962).

Hill v. The Div. of Soc. Servs.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jan 16, 2024

Opinion of the Court attests that it declines “to cover individuals qualifying as parents or other caretaker relatives who are not mandatorily eligible and who have income at or below a standard established by the State … “When two statutes apparently overlap, it is well established that the statute special and particular shall control over the statute general in nature, even if the general statute is more recent, unless it clearly appears

Britt v. State

185 N.C. App. 610 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 4, 2007

“A vested right is a right ‘which is otherwise secured, established, and immune from further legal metamorphosis.’ ” Bowen v. Mabry, 154 N.C. … Stat. § 14-415.1 (2004), the law at issue in this case clearly states plaintiff may not possess a firearm for any reason.

In Re QV

596 S.E.2d 867 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 15, 2004

that the award would be clearly inappropriate. … that the award would be clearly inappropriate."

Bradley Home, Caring for Wake Cmty. & the Carolinas

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 16, 2024

The language in Smith clearly demonstrated a legislative intent separate and distinct to create a uniform time limitation, regardless of delivery method the agency used, and established a different procedure from that … As the Superior Court properly concluded, nothing “clearly indicates legislative intent to establish ‘a differing procedure’ from that prescribed by G.S. 1A-1, Rule 6(e).” Smith, 64 N.C.

Goble v. Helms

64 N.C. App. 439 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 18, 1983

Plaintiff-wife, by virtue of observation and experience, was well qualified to offer her opinion. We thus find defendants’ contention without merit. … The foregoing and other evidence clearly sufficed to establish a demonstrable diminution in plaintiff-husband’s capacity to render service to plaintiff-wife.

Board of Directors of Queens Towers Homeowners' Ass'n v. Rosenstadt

214 N.C. App. 162 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 2, 2011

The Act qualifies this definition by stating, “unless otherwise provided in the declaration!.]” Id. … Conclusion Defendants failed to establish the existence of a genuine issue of material fact for the court to resolve.

Wright v. O'Neal Motors, Inc.

57 N.C. App. 49 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 4, 1982

The threshold question in this appeal is whether there is a clearly recognizable level or degree of nonconformity which plaintiff must experience in order to establish that the nonconformities he has alleged would substantially … She does not, therefore, qualify for relief under G.S. 25-2-608. In Motors, Inc. v.

Brown v. American Partners

183 N.C. App. 529 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 5, 2007

I am over 18 years of age and duly qualified to give this affidavit. 2. I have personal knowledge of the matters stated herein. 3. … As this Court has recognized, "[m]aterials that are prepared in the ordinary course of business . . . are not protected by the work product immunity." Id. at 28, 541 S.E.2d at 789 .

State v. Wise

178 N.C. App. 154 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 20, 2006

[Prosecutor]: Is it regular practice of the sheriffs department, in fact, to establish a sex offender worksheet when a person initially comes and registers? [Deputy Burgess]: Yes, sir. Every time. … The legislature chose not to limit the applicability of Rule 803(6) to police records and reports which qualify as records of regularly conducted activity.

Moss v. N.C. Dep't of State Treasurer

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 5, 2022

¶ 18 Here, Plaintiffs were both employed as teachers for the State for at least one year, and thus, Plaintiffs qualified for long-term disability benefits. … ¶ 23 Here, Plaintiffs specifically contend that Defendant waived the defense of sovereign immunity when it entered into a contract with Plaintiffs. See Guthrie v.

Robins v. Town of Hillsborough

176 N.C. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 21, 2006

Our Supreme Court held, "Clearly, Northwestern established a right of review under the 1986 ordinance with the submission of plans both on 5 June 1987 (the first plan) and on 21 September 1987 (the second plan) unless that … However, North Carolina recognizes two methods *820 by which a landowner may establish vested rights in a zoning ordinance: (1) qualify pursuant to relevant statutes establishing such vested rights; or (2) qualify under the

State v. Abrams

248 N.C. App. 639 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 2, 2016

ABRAMS Opinion of the Court the NC Lab specifically to analyze and identify marijuana, her testimony was clearly the “product of reliable principles and methods” sufficient to satisfy … The movant must show the witness is “qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education . . . .” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 8C-1, Rule 702(a) (2015).

Fox v. Fox

114 N.C. App. 125 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 5, 1994

On 31 October 1991, the trial court entered the equitable distribution judgment and the Qualified Domestic Relations Order which are the subjects of the present appeal. … (Accent); thereafter he established Accent’s Profit-Sharing Plan and Trust (the Accent Plan). As the result of several transactions, the A-l Plan assets were “rolled” into the Accent Plan.

State v. Westall

116 N.C. App. 534 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 18, 1994

Neither of the agents had been formally qualified as experts. … On cross-examination, defendant established that Detective Smith, contrary to his usual procedure, had made no notes during or after Minish’s interview.