Legal Opinion

Cieszko v. Clark

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided December 20, 1988No. 883SC560PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PARKER, Judge.

As a preliminary matter, we find it necessary to clarify the scope of our review in this appeal. Plaintiffs, bring forward nine assignments of error, many of which are directed to findings of fact and conclusions of law made by the trial court in support of its order. The entry of summary judgment presupposes that there are no issues of material fact; so findings of fact are not required. Insurance Agency v. Leasing Corp., 26 N.C. App. 138, 142, 215 S.E. 2d 162, 165 (1975). Nevertheless, it may be helpful in some cases for the trial court to summarize the undisputed facts which…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Hyde Insurance Agency, Inc. v. Dixie Leasing Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1975
  2. Vassey v. BurchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  3. Taylor v. City of RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  4. Teachey v. . GurleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  5. Ellis v. WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Atlantic Coast Mechanical, Inc. v. Arcadis, Geraghty & Miller of North Carolina, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2006
  2. Nebraska Public Employees Local No. 251 v. City of OmahaNebraska Supreme Court · 1993
  3. Allen v. City of Burlington Board of AdjustmentCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
  4. Pittman v. BarkerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1995
  5. York Oil Co. v. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health & Natural ResourcesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004

14 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