Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Pinewood Homes, Inc. v. Harris

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided July 17, 2007No. COA06-690Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWynn, Judge

I concur with that portion of the majority opinion that affirms the trial court’s denial of Plaintiff’s motion to amend their complaint. However, because I find that the timing of Plaintiffs’ complaint for tortious interference makes it a collateral attack on the preliminary injunction sought by Defendants, I would affirm the trial court’s dismissal of that cause of action. Additionally, after reviewing Plaintiffs’ original complaint for abuse of process, I conclude they failed to allege any facts that would support a claim of abuse of process. Therefore, I respectfully dissent.

*609I.

As noted by…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Sutton v. DukeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  2. Stanback v. StanbackSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  3. Oates v. Jag, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
  4. Childress v. AbelesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  5. Isenhour v. HuttoSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1999

10 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