Legal Opinion

Crumpler v. Thornburg

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 7, 1989No. 8810SC354PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ARNOLD, Judge.

In their first assignment of error defendants contend that the trial court was without jurisdiction to hear plaintiffs summary judgment motion because there was no actual or real existing controversy between the parties. We disagree. Rather we find that the case was moot at the time Judge Battle ruled on the summary judgment motion and should have been dismissed.

Jurisdiction under the Declaratory Judgment Act, G.S. 1-253 et seq., may be invoked “only in a case in which there is an actual or real existing controversy between parties having adverse interests in the matter in…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Southern Pacific Terminal Co. v. Interstate Commerce CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
  2. In Re Inquiry Concerning a Judge No. 53 PeoplesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
  3. Adams v. North Carolina Department of Natural & Economic ResourcesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
  4. Lide v. MearsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  5. Town of Tryon v. Duke Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1942

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

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Boney Publishers, Inc. v. Burlington City CouncilCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
  2. North Carolina Council of Churches v. StateCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1995
  3. In Re the Investigation Into the Injury of BrooksCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
  4. Shell Island Homeowners Ass'n v. TomlinsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
  5. State v. CorkumCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2012

20 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