Whether the General Assembly intended to exempt by implication the Teachers' and State Employees' Retirement System's Board of Trustees from rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act, N.C.G.S. 150B, in adopting a Contribution-Based Benefit Cap pursuant to N.C.G.S. 135- 5(a3).

Whether the Business Court erred in denying the tax refund claim as procedurally defective because the taxpayer changed the basis of its refund.

Whether a contract's liquidated damages provision created a genuine issue of material fact, thereby precluding summary judgment for plaintiff and whether the contract with plaintiff was in violation of defendant's charter and the statutes governing its operation and is therefore null and void.

Termination of parental rights; whether the trial court erred by concluding respondent willfully abandoned his child where respondent attended visitations with the child after the petition was filed; whether the trial court abused its discretion in determining the child's best interest.

Appeal from an order terminating respondent's parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(7); willful abandonment.

Appeal from an order terminating parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1) and (2); whether the trial court issued sufficient findings of fact regarding progress leading up to the termination hearing to support its ultimate findings of fact and conclusions of law that grounds existed to terminate parental rights; whether the trial court abused its discretion in terminating parental rights.

Whether there is an irreconcilable conflict between N.C.G.S. 160A-360(e) and N.C.G.S. 160A-360(f), as amended by Session Law 1999-35, that invalidates the applicability of subsection (e).

Whether (1) defendant's challenges to the sufficiency of the State's evidence were preserved; (2) the State presented sufficient evidence that defendant aided and abetted; and (3) the State presented sufficient evidence that defendant obtained a 'thing of value' as defined under N.C.G.S. 14-100.

Whether the trial court abused its discretion when it overruled defendant's objections during the prosecutor's closing argument.