Whether the trial court had subject matter jurisdiction to enter its order dated 17 April 2023.

UCCJEA, subject matter jurisdiction, foreign state, interlocutory order, substantial right

child support, alimony, findings not supported by competent evidence, conclusions and decretal paragraphs erroneous; vacated and remanded

Fruits of Their Labor, Residential Zoning, Standing

child custody, temporary versus permanent custody order, error in applying best interests standard to a permanent custody order, error in modifying permanent order without finding a substantial change of circumstances

Chapter 50, termination of jurisdiction, custody, visitation, improper delegation, clear and convincing evidence, permanency planning

termination of parental rights; neglect; N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)(1); incarceration; likelihood of future neglect.

first-degree murder; attempted murder; discharging a firearm within an occupied enclosure with the intent to incite fear; self-defense; felony-disqualifier limiting instruction under N.C. Gen. Stat. 14-51.4(1); defense of accident; unpreserved constitutional argument; Rule 2

probation revocation; absconding from supervision; abuse of discretion

Motion for Mistrial; Sustained Objection; Substantial and Irreparable Prejudice

Whether the proposed class members in a class action against a county are ascertainable and whether the proposed class satisfies the predominance and superiority criteria.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred by dismissing defendants' appeal from the trial court's interlocutory order denying defendants' motion to reconsider.

Whether a trial court's permanency planning order included sufficient findings of fact to satisfy statutory criteria.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the trial court's order issuing a domestic violence protective order.

Whether defendant's emails satisfy the statute of frauds as a note or memorandum of defendant's oral guaranty.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred by reversing the trial court's denial of defendant's motion to dismiss the charge of robbery with a dangerous weapon.

Whether the Court of Appeals correctly determined that the general prohibition on harsher resentencing in N.C.G.S. 15A-1335 did not apply to a case where the initial sentence had violated the mandatory sentencing framework.