Appellate Court Opinions
Search Case Summaries / Headnotes.
View PDF Volumes.
33,838 Appellate Court Opinions
State v. Harrison
motion to suppress; checkpoint stop
State v. Hill
Alleged Prosecutorial Vindictiveness.
State v. Jefferies
Lay witness identification, Relevant evidence, Waiver of Confrontation Clause rights by stipulation
State v. McMannus
Sixth Amendment; Self Representation; Statutory Requirements; Limiting Instruction; Plain Error; Restitution
State v. Miller
Necessity, Duress, Defense, Instruction
State v. Russell
Second-degree murder; police reports inadmissible under Rule 803(6)'s business-records hearsay exception; Rule 404(b) evidence; motion to dismiss for insufficient evidence of malice; Rule 401 relevancy.
State v. Solomon
N.C. Gen. Stat. 14-190.9(a2); indecent exposure on private premises; jury instructions; basis for restitution
State v. Watson
Motion for Appropriate Relief; Commitment Orders; Judgments and Sentencing; Judicial Notice; Service of Sentence
State v. Webb
Felonious larceny; jury instructions; breaking or entering; sufficient evidence to support jury finding that defendant personally committed the crime
Tibbs v. Ford
Interim distribution of assets; Interlocutory appeal; Substantial right test
Abrons Fam. Prac. & Urgent Care, PA v. N.C. Dep't of Health & Hum. Servs.
Civil complaint filed by various medical practices to recover damages and other relief for the State's failure to properly implement a new electronic payment system to reimburse plaintiffs for their services to Medicaid-eligible patients; whether the trial court erred in dismissing plaintiffs' complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because plaintiffs did not exhaust their administrative remedies before filing a civil suit.
Allied Spectrum, LLC v. Ger. Auto Ctr., Inc.
Civil action for breach of contract and related claims; whether plaintiff was entitled to voluntarily dismiss its case under Civil Procedure Rule 41(a)(1) after end of summary judgment hearing but before the court issued its ruling; whether the trial court erred in entering summary judgment for defendants.
Davis v. Hulsing Enters.
Whether North Carolina recognizes a first-party claim for dram shop liability; if so, whether that claim is barred by the contributory negligence of plaintiff's decedent.
In re D.E.M.
Termination of parental rights; whether the mother willfully abandoned the juvenile as defined in subdivision 7B-1111(a)(7) of the Juvenile Code.
In re J.A.M.
Minor child; adjudication of neglect and dispositional order ceasing reunification efforts; whether clear and convincing evidence supported findings of fact on which the order was based.
In re Se. Eye Ctr.
Appeal from interlocutory orders of N.C. Business Court approving a Settlement Agreement between plaintiffs and some defendants and appointing a Receiver for another defendant that is a Trust.
In re Se. Eye Ctr.
Appeal from interlocutory order of N.C. Business Court approving a Settlement Agreement entered in one of a series of lawsuits; whether the claimant was inappropriately granted secured status as part of her settlement with the Receiver administering defendants' assets; whether the court abused its discretion in approving the settlement.
In re Se. Eye Ctr.
Appeal from interlocutory order of N.C. Business Court approving a Settlement Agreement entered in one of a series of lawsuits; whether the claimant was inappropriately granted secured status as part of her settlement with the Receiver administering defendants' assets; whether the court abused its discretion in approving the settlement.
King v. Albemarle Hosp. Auth.
Medical malpractice action on behalf of minor child for birth-related injuries; whether, after the complaint was dismissed under Rule 41 and refiled six years later, N.C.G.S. 1-17(b) extended the three-year statute of limitations for professional malpractice actions established in N.C.G.S 15(c), thus preventing the refiled complaint from being time barred.
N.C. Dep't of Transp. v. Mission Battleground Park, DST
Condemnation proceeding under Chapter 136 to take a portion of defendants' property for highway improvement purposes; whether the trial court abused its discretion in excluding expert opinion testimony on valuation offered by defendants because the trial court did not consider admissibility of the testimony under Evidence Rule 702 rather than N.C.G.S. 93A-83; whether it was improper for the trial court to instruct the jury that the jury should not consider the taking and use of adjoining lands of others for the same undertaking in determining just compensation.