Separation; Divorce; Alimony; Higher Education Contributions; Fraud; Warranty of Disclosure; Rescission; Ratification; Motion for Summary Judgment; Specific Performance

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in reversing the judgment of the trial court on the basis that plaintiffs' sweepstakes game violates N.C.G.S. 14-306.4.

Termination of parental rights; no-merit brief.

Whether the trial court erred by denying a motion to continue the termination hearing; whether the trial court complied with the requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act; and whether the trial court erred by eliminating visitation in the permanency planning order.

Termination of parental rights; whether the trial court erred by determining that there was a likelihood of future neglect if the child was returned to respondent's care.

Termination of parental rights; whether the trial court properly concluded respondent's parental rights were subject to termination under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1); whether the trial court abused its discretion when it concluded termination was in the child's best interests.

Termination of parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(5) (2019); no-merit review pursuant to Rule 3.1(e) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.

Review of Court of Appeals' decision addressing trial court's dismissal of a claim of neglect; de novo review.

Whether the Industrial Commission's calculation of the plaintiff's average weekly wages pursuant to N.C.G.S. 97-2(5) and its determination concerning whether that calculation produces results that are fair and just to both parties involve an issue of law or an issue of fact.

Whether plaintiff's amended complaint sufficed to allege a claim for relief pursuant to N.C.G.S. 147-76.1.

Business investments are not 'in or affecting commerce' under the North Carolina Unfair or Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

Whether the trial court committed plain error in permitting expert testimony that the victim was 'sexually abused' in the absence of physical evidence or in permitting testimony identifying the defendant as the perpetrator. Whether defendant received ineffective assistance of counsel on the face of the record.

Whether the trial court committed clear error in overruling defendant's Batson challenge.

Whether the probation violation reports entered in defendant's case sufficiently pleaded that defendant had absconded supervision; whether the trial court abused its discretion in revoking defendant's probation pursuant to a finding that defendant in fact absconded supervision.

Whether the trial court erred by instructing the jury that defendant would not be entitled to self-defense if the jury found that he was a felon in possession of a firearm at the time of the killing.

Whether the trial court's admission of testimony that we assume arguendo violated defendant's rights under the Confrontation Clause and Rule 404(b) was prejudicial.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred by reversing defendant's convictions for insufficient evidence.