Whether 'capacity use' fees charged to residential property developers for the purpose of expanding and improving the county's water and sewage system as a precondition for the county's concurrence in a developer's application to the Department of Environmental Quality for a required water and sewer permit constitute monetary exactions subject to review under the 'unconstitutional conditions' doctrine.

Affirming a business court order and opinion based on its proper application of the law of attorney-client privilege to communications with an outside law firm made in the course of investigation of alleged violations of company's sexual harassment policy.

Whether advanced practice registered nurses owe a statutory, professional duty of care to patients in the context of the planning of, collaboration on, and selection of a patient's treatment.

Whether the trial court erred in terminating respondent's parental rights for neglect and failure to show reasonable progress in correcting the conditions which led to removal under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1) and (2).

Whether a motion to dismiss for failure to comply with Rule 9(j) should be assessed based on what the plaintiff reasonably believed at the time the Rule 9(j) certification was filed. Whether the Court of Appeals utilized the correct standard of review in examining whether certain evidence was properly admitted under Rule 702.

Whether a General Assembly comprised of legislators elected pursuant to legislative districts that had been determined to be unconstitutionally racially gerrymandered possessed the authority to initiate the process for amending the North Carolina Constitution.

Whether the trial court could entertain any of the claims brought by the former pastor of a church who alleged he was improperly terminated by the church's Board of Directors, or whether doing so required the court to become impermissibly entangled with ecclesiastical matters in violation of the First Amendment.

Whether 'capacity use' fees charged to residential property developers for the purpose of expanding and improving the county's water and sewage system as a precondition for the county's concurrence in a developer's application to the Department of Environmental Quality for a required water and sewer permit constitute monetary exactions subject to review under the 'unconstitutional conditions' doctrine.

Whether the doctrine of governmental immunity shields a municipality from claims alleging that it fraudulently entered into contracts for fire protection services and for the acquisition of land used to provide such services; whether the doctrine of legislative immunity shields a mayor from a claim alleging that he fraudulently induced the town council to terminate contracts entered into for the provision of fire protection services.

Whether the trial court erred in denying defendant's motion for a transcript of a prior trial and motion to continue.

Whether the trial court deprived defendant of his right to confront witnesses against him at defendant's probation revocation hearing.

Whether a juvenile defendant received ineffective assistance of counsel during a resentencing hearing because counsel did not ask the court to run all of the defendant's sentences concurrently.

Revocable trust; appellate jurisdiction, trial court's subject matter jurisdiction, and the trustee's duties and powers concerning trust litigation.

Termination of parental rights; whether the trial court erred by denying respondent's motion to continue.

Termination of parental rights; whether the trial court erred by denying respondent-father's motion to continue; whether the trial court properly concluded respondents' parental rights were subject to termination under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1).

Whether the trial court erred in ceasing reunification efforts; whether the trial court made the required findings under N.C.G.S. 7B-906.2(d) to eliminate reunification from the permanent plan.

Appeal from orders terminating respondent-mother's and respondent-father's parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1)-(3), (6), and (7); whether the trial court erred by not appointing respondent-mother a guardian ad litem; whether the trial court's findings of fact support its adjudication of grounds to terminate respondent-father's parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(7); whether the trial court abused its discretion by determining it was in K.D.M.J.'s best interests to terminate respondents' parental rights.

Appeal from an order terminating respondents' parental rights; whether the evidence supports the trial court's findings of fact and conclusions of law that grounds existed to terminate respondents' parental rights for failure to pay a reasonable portion of the cost of the care provided to the juveniles pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(3); whether the trial court abused its discretion in terminating respondents' parental rights.