Town of Chapel Hill v. Burchette
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
WELLS, Judge.
Defendants attempt to argue that because they held the property as tenants by the entirety, plaintiff could not acquire title to their interest unless it did so simultaneously. In support of this argument defendants rely on plaintiff’s failure to name Elsie Burchette as a defendant in the original complaint. We note that defendants did not raise this argument below. A contention not raised in the trial court may not be raised for the first time on appeal. See, e.g., Williams v. Burlington Industries, Inc., 75 N.C. App. 273, 330 S.E.2d 657 (1985), rev’d on other grounds, 318 N.C.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Williams v. Burlington Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
- City of Charlotte v. RoussoCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
- Turner Halsey Co. v. Lawrence Knitting Mills, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
- Overnite Transportation Co. v. StyerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
- Williams v. Burlington Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Fieldcrest Cannon, Inc. v. Fireman's Fund InsuranceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1996
- Creasman v. CreasmanCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
- In Re Goddard & Peterson, PLLCCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016
- J.M. Parker & Sons, Inc. v. William Barber, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010
- Scoggins v. JacobsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.