Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Bailey v. State

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 6, 1991No. 105PA91Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Mitchell

Like the majority, I believe that the trial court was correct in entering summary judgment for the defendants Powers and Boyles as to the claims made against them in their individual capacities. Therefore, I concur in Part IV of the opinion of the majority which affirms summary judgment entered by the trial court in favor of those two defendants.

I dissent from those parts of the opinion of the majority which (1) reverse the trial court’s partial summary judgment for the plaintiffs and (2) remand this case to the Superior Court, Wake County, for entry of summary judgment in favor of the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Honig v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  2. Mercury Machine Importing Corp. v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1957
  3. Orange County v. Department of TransportationCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  4. Santa Barbara Optical Co. v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
  5. Waddill v. . MastenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916

4 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