Legal Opinion

City of Raleigh v. Edwards

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 21, 1951No. 452PublishedCited by 59 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEbviN, J.

This question arises at the threshold of plaintiff’s appeal: Is an interlocutory order granting a motion to intervene in a condemnation proceeding appealable?

Appellate procedure is designed to eliminate the unnecessary delay and expense of repeated fragmentary appeals, and to present the whole case for determination in a single appeal from the final judgment. To this end, the statute defining the right of appeal prescribes, in substance, that an appeal does not lie to the Supreme Court from an interlocutory order of the Superior Court, unless such interlocutory order deprives the appellant of…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Veazey v. City of DurhamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  2. Gammon v. . JohnsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1900
  3. Service Fire Insurance v. Horton Motor Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  4. Bernard v. Shemwell.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
  5. Emry v. ParkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892

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

3Cited by59 opinions

  1. Waters v. Qualified Personnel, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
  2. Oestreicher v. American National Stores, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  3. North Carolina Consumers Power, Inc. v. Duke Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  4. Tridyn Industries, Inc. v. American Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  5. Bailey v. GoodingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980

54 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