Whether an interpretive rule in Orange County's zoning ordinances resolves any potential ambiguity between the applicable ordinance's text and a corresponding table.

Whether this Court can review issues raised in a Court of Appeals dissent that were not raised or argued by the parties.

Whether a developer was entitled to summary judgment on the negligence claims of a homeowner who suffered injury when she fell through her ceiling after stepping backwards in her attic without looking.

Summary judgment was proper in an eminent domain action when the trial court resolves all pleaded issues associated with property rights taken as of the date of the taking.

Whether Nationwide effectively cancelled plaintiffs' fire insurance policy in line with N.C.G.S. 58-44-16(f)(10).

Whether the Court of Appeals erred by reversing the trial court's adjudications of neglect and dependency and remanding for dismissal of the juvenile petitions.

Whether defendants' counterclaim alleged colorable constitutional claims under the Fruits of Their Labor Clause and Equal Protection Clause of the North Carolina Constitution sufficient to overcome the State's claim of sovereign immunity.

Defendant was properly indicted for multiple counts of human trafficking per victim. Further, although the trial court erred by failing to consider the substantial similarity of defendant's offenses pursuant to N.C.G.S. 15A-1340-14(e), the error did not prejudice defendant.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in reversing the trial court's denial of the defendant's motion to dismiss the charge of robbery with a dangerous weapon and in granting the defendant a new trial on the charge of first-degree murder.

Whether Chapter 17 of the General Statutes requires summary denial of an application to prosecute the writ of habeas corpus when the applicant is detained by virtue of a final judgment of a competent court of criminal jurisdiction.

Whether the trial court erred by instructing the jury that defendant did not have the right to use excessive force under the castle doctrine.

Whether plaintiffs must exhaust administrative remedies before filing a Corum claim under Article I, Section 19 of the North Carolina Constitution.

Whether the Court of Appeals correctly determined that the trial court erred in denying visitation to respondent-mother.

Whether persons involved in the preparation and filing of election protests are entitled to the absolute privilege in a defamation action when they did not subsequently participate in the election protest hearing as a party, counsel, or witness.

Whether a unilateral amendment made pursuant to a change-of-terms provision violates the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and renders a contract illusory.

Whether plaintiffs have taxpayer standing to challenge a city's red light camera program, and whether the framework used to fund that camera program violates Article IX, sec. 7 of North Carolina's Constitution.

Whether the trial court properly granted summary judgment against parties asserting adverse possession where the claimants mistakenly believed they owned the disputed tract and the evidence viewed in the light most favorable to them did not show permissive use.