Jones v. Ratley
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1DissentTyson, Judge
The trial court’s Judgment fails to: (1) set forth proper conclusions of law; (2) make a finding of fact regarding whether plaintiff *131was obligated to pay $2,000.00 to Ratley; and (3) address whether plaintiff should have had notice of the dismissal taken by in the earlier action. I would reverse and remand the trial court’s judgment. I respectfully dissent.
I. De Novo Review at the District Court
The majority’s opinion holds that “the legislature intended that the informal processes of the small claims court continue in the de novo appeal” and relies largely upon the case of Duke Power Co. v.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Coble v. CobleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
- State v. SparrowSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
- Girard Trust Bank v. EastonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1971
- Duke Power Co. v. DanielsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
- Department of Transportation v. ByerlyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.