Legal Opinion

Mathis v. May

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided July 21, 1987No. 8626SC1333PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORR, Judge.

Plaintiffs contend that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment, because the applicable statute of limitations had not expired prior to the filing of this action. We do not agree.

“A motion for summary judgment may be granted only when there is no genuine issue as to any material fact, and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Ballenger v. Crowell, 38 N.C. App. 50, 53, 247 S.E. 2d 287, 290 (1978). The rule “allows quick and final disposition of claims where there is no real question as to whether plaintiff should recover, or where the defendant has…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Black v. LittlejohnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
  2. Ballenger v. CrowellCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
  3. Flippin v. JarrellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  4. Congleton v. City of AsheboroCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1970
  5. Oakley v. LittleCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Horton v. Carolina Medicorp, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1996
  2. Hargett v. HollandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1994
  3. Callahan v. RogersCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988
  4. Gail Conner v. St. Luke's Hospital, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1993
  5. Osborne v. WaltonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1993

3 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