Appellate Court Opinions
Search Case Summaries / Headnotes.
View PDF Volumes.
2,650 Appellate Court Opinions
State v. Franklin
Whether the trial court erred in denying defendant's motion to suppress evidence seized from a traffic stop; whether the stop was pretextual and in duration unreasonable.
Wind v. City of Gastonia
Whether defendant?s employee is entitled to a complete, unredacted copy of all documents in his personnel file related to complaints filed against him; statutory interpretation of N.C.G.S. ' 160A-168
Supreme Court Opinions Filed November 8, 2013
Chandler v. Atl. Scrap & Processing
Workers' Compensation; when the Industrial Commission does not preapprove attendant care, whether the lack of such preapproval bars an employee from being reimbursed for retroactive attendant care services
Green v. Freeman
Suit by investors to recover money lost in a business venture; liability of one individual defendant based on breach of fiduciary duty and piercing the corporate veil
Hoke Cnty. Bd. of Educ. v State
Whether the constitutional right to a sound basic education requires the State to provide access to prekindergarten programs for all eligible, at-risk four year olds
Johnston v. State
Whether the North Carolina Felony Firearms Act, which bars certain felons from possessing firearms anywhere, is unconstitutional as applied to plaintiff
Mehaffey v. Burger King
Workers' Compensation; when the Industrial Commission does not preapprove attendant care, whether the lack of such preapproval bars an employee from being reimbursed for retroactive attendant care services
State v. Cox
Appeal from defendant's conviction for possession of a firearm by a felon; whether the State presented sufficient evidence to corroborate defendant's confession.
State v. Heien
On remand: motion to suppress; whether an initial stop by a police officer for a vehicle equipment violation had become consensual when defendant consented to a search of his vehicle
State v. Huss
Appeal from defendant's convictions for first-degree kidnapping, second-degree rape, and second-degree sexual offense; whether the State proved that the victim was physically helpless, as required under N.C.G.S. ?? 14-27.3(a)(2) and 14-27.5(a)(2)
Tyndall v. Ford Motor Co.
Products liability action; whether an appellate court has jurisdiction to hear an interlocutory appeal from a trial court's denial of a motion to dismiss based on a statute of repose; determination of which statute of repose applies to the instant action
Supreme Court Opinions Filed October 4, 2013
Green v. Kearney
Whether plaintiffs whose claims were dismissed with prejudice before a final judgment was taken as to all parties should be liable for payment of costs of defending the action that were incurred after their claim was dismissed; N.C. R. Civ. P. 54(b)
Ramey Kemp & Assocs., Inc. v Richmond Hills Residential Partners, LLC
Trial court's grant of summary judgment for plaintiff on its claim of materialmen's lien under N.C.G.S. ? 44A-8; whether there were genuine issues of material fact.
State v. Hester
Whether the trial court committed plain error in admitting lay testimony identifying defendant as the perpetrator of a crime based primarily on original surveillance video footage not introduced at trial
State v. McDaris
Whether there was a fatal variance between the indictment under which defendant was charged and the trial court's instructions to the jury
State v. McKenzie
Whether a DWI charge should be dismissed on double jeopardy grounds because of DMV's previous one-year suspension of defendant's commercial driver?s license following his arrest for DWI
State v. Pizano-Trejo
Plain error review; whether a defendant convicted of first-degree statutory sexual offense with a child under N.C.G.S. ? 14-27.4(a)(1) should have that conviction vacated because of a variance between the language in the indictment and in the trial court's instructions to the jury
State v. Rollins
Denial of defendant's MAR following his convictions; whether the trial court abused its discretion by not holding an evidentiary hearing to consider defendant's claim that he did not receive a fair trial because of juror misconduct