Legal Opinion

Hare v. Butler

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided August 7, 1990No. 8926SC965PublishedCited by 68 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ARNOLD, Judge.

Initially, we must decide if this appeal is interlocutory and therefore inappropriate at this time. See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 54(b) (1983). The judgment below is not final as to all claims and parties. However, we find that plaintiff has a substantial right to have all of his claims for relief tried at the same time before the same judge and jury, and therefore allow this appeal. Shelton v. Fairley, 86 N.C. App. 147, 356 S.E.2d 917, cert. denied, 320 N.C. 634, 360 S.E.2d 94 (1987); see Nance v. Robertson, 91 N.C. App. 121, 370 S.E.2d 283, disc. rev. denied, 323 N.C. 477,…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Long v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  2. Givens v. SellarsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  3. Millar v. Town of WilsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  4. State v. HordSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  5. Jensen Ex Rel. Estate of Clark v. South Carolina Department of Social ServicesCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1987

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

3Cited by68 opinions

  1. Shaw v. StroudCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1994
  2. Meyer v. WallsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1997
  3. Isenhour v. HuttoSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1999
  4. Block v. County of PersonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
  5. Epps v. Duke University, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1996

63 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