Appellate Court Opinions
Search Case Summaries / Headnotes.
View PDF Volumes.
33,453 Appellate Court Opinions
Smith v. AutoMoney, Inc.
Personal Jurisdiction; Minimum Contacts; Rule 12(b)(2) motion; Rule 12(b)(6) motion; Choice of Law Provision; N.C. Gen Stat. § 53-190; Predatory Lending; Fundamental Public Policy.
State v. Johnson
Batson objection; peremptory strikes; discrimination
State v. Juarez
Objection to State closing argument, jury instruction on flight, identity of perpetrator, remand to correct clerical error
State v. Lancaster
Defective indictment, armed to the terror of the public, public highway, lack of jurisdiction
State v. Martin
Petition for Writ of Certiorari; Prior Convictions; Plain Error; N.C. Gen. Stat. § 8C-1 Rule 402; N.C. Gen. Stat. § 8C-1 Rule 404(b); Ineffective Assistance of Counsel; Motion for Appropriate Relief
State v. Rouse
habitual impaired driving; suppression; eyewitness testimony; due process, eyewitness identification reform act; sufficiency; jury instruction on flight
Sturdifen v. Brown
child custody; motion to modify custody; relocation; Ramirez-Barker v. Barker; findings of fact; conclusions of law
Troublefield v. AutoMoney, Inc.
Rule 12(b)(3) motion; Venue; Forum Selection Provision; Personal Jurisdiction; Minimum Contacts; Rule 12(b)(2) motion; Rule 12(b)(6) motion; Choice of Law Provision; N.C. Gen Stat. § 53-190; Predatory Lending; Fundamental Public Policy.
Wall v. AutoMoney, Inc.
Usury Law; NCCFA; UDTPA; Choice-of-Law, Choice-of-Venue, Personal Jurisdiction; Motion to Dismiss
Wallace v. AutoMoney, Inc.
N.C. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6); motion to dismiss; personal jurisdiction; minimum contacts
Warley v. AutoMoney, Inc.
Usury Law; NCCFA; UDTPA; Choice-of-Law; Choice-of-Venue; Personal Jurisdiction; Motion to Dismiss
Webb v. Jarvis
Child custody; third party standing; constitutional right to parent; inconsistent parental acts; delegation of parental authority; criminal convictions
Woody v. AccuQuest Hearing Ctr., LLC
motion to dismiss; common-law claim for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy; preemption; statute of limitations
In re A.M.C.
Termination of parental rights; whether the trial court erred by denying respondent's motion to continue.
In re B.E.
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).
In re C.H.
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.
In re J.A.J.
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.
In re J.C.J.
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.
In re J.D.O.
Termination of parental rights; lack of jurisdictional findings under N.C.G.S. 7B-1101; judicial notice of documents in the case file; adjudication of neglect under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1); sufficiency of adjudicatory findings; likelihood of future neglect; cumulative error.
In re K.N.
Appeal from an order terminating respondent's parental rights; whether the trial court erred by entering findings of fact and conclusions of law as a substitute judge despite not hearing the evidence.