Stokes v. Crumpton
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1DissentCalabria, Judge
Although the majority correctly cites Dworsky v. Travelers Ins. Co., 49 N.C.App. 446, 271 S.E.2d 522 (1980) regarding the substantial right justifying immediate appeal of an interlocutory order denying discovery, I do not believe the majority correctly applies the law to the facts of this case. Plaintiff has demonstrated he would be deprived of the substantial right contemplated by Dworsky sufficient to justify immediate review. Alternatively, I would allow plaintiff's petition for a writ of certiorari to address his appeal on the merits. Either way, the trial court erred by concluding there…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Veazey v. City of DurhamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
- Cortez Byrd Chips, Inc. v. Bill Harbert Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Bailey v. GoodingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
- Department of Transportation v. RoweSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1999
- City of Raleigh v. EdwardsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.