Legal Opinion

Home Indemnity Co. v. Hoechst Celanese Corp.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided December 16, 1997No. COA97-321PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

EAGLES, Judge.

When evaluating the propriety of a trial court’s stay order the appropriate standard of review is abuse of discretion. Home Indem. *118Co. v. Hoechst-Celanese Corp., 99 N.C. App. 322, 325, 393 S.E.2d 118, 120 (1990), appeal dismissed and cert. denied, 327 N.C. 428, 396 S.E.2d 611 (1990). A trial court may be reversed for abuse of discretion only if the trial court made “a patently arbitrary decision, manifestly unsupported by reason.” Buford v. General Motors Corp., 339 N.C. 396, 406, 451 S.E.2d 293, 298 (1994). Rather, appellate review is limited to “insur[ing] that the decision…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Calloway v. Ford Motor CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  2. Little v. Penn Ventilator Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
  3. Tennessee-Carolina Transportation, Inc. v. Strick Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  4. Motor Inn Management, Inc. v. Irvin-Fuller Development Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  5. Leksi, Inc. v. Federal InsuranceDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1990

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Meares v. Town of BeaufortCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2008
  2. Park East Sales v. Clark-Langley, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2007
  3. Home Indem. Co. v. Hoechst Celanese Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1997
  4. Se. Sureties Grp., Inc. v. Int'l Fid. Ins. Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2015
  5. La Mack v. ObeidNorth Carolina Business Court · 2015

2 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