Legal Opinion

Hale v. Leisure

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided August 21, 1990No. 8913SC1283PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORR, Judge.

The dispositive issue on appeal is whether plaintiffs motion for extension of time, or in the alternative, motion for certiorari should be granted by this Court. For the reasons below, we deny plaintiffs motion for extension of time and motion for certiorari and dismiss the appeal.

I

Motion for Extension of Time

The following facts are pertinent to this case on appeal.

On 11 December 1986, plaintiff filed a wrongful death lawsuit which arose from an automobile accident on 20 October 1986. The accident occurred when defendant Leisure allegedly lost control of a tractor-trailer truck and…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Watch v. United States Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
  2. Casey v. GriceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
  3. C. C. Woods Construction Co. v. Budd-Piper Roofing Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  4. State v. WardCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
  5. Roberts v. RobertsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Norris v. SattlerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
  2. Gibbons v. CIT GROUP/SALES FINANCING, INC.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1991

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API