Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Long v. Interstate Casualty Insurance

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided June 16, 1992No. 9110SC777PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WALKER, Judge.

Appellants contend the trial court should have granted their motion to intervene both as a matter of right pursuant to Rule 24(a)(2), N.C. Rules of Civil Procedure and permissively pursuant to Rule 24(b), N.C. Rules of Civil Procedure. We now examine each of these contentions separately.

Appellants argue that they should be allowed to intervene as a matter of right in order to obtain copies of all the Winners Circle contracts. They assert this information is needed so that other Winners Circle purchasers can be informed of their rights. In particular, appellants contend that…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Ellis v. EllisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Virmani v. Presbyterian Health Services Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1999
  2. United Services Automobile Ass'n v. SimpsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1997
  3. Harvey Fertilizer & Gas Co. v. Pitt CountyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
  4. Alford v. DavisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1998
  5. Procter v. City of Raleigh Board of AdjustmentCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API