Legal Opinion

Gibson v. Cline

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided March 3, 1976No. 7530SC836PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BRITT, Judge.

Defendants contend that the order appealed from does not meet the requirements of G.S. 1A-1, Rule 65(d). This contention has merit.

G.S. 1A-1, Rule 65(d), provides in pertinent part as follows: “Every order granting an injunction and every restraining order shall set forth the reasons for its issuance; shall be specific in terms; shall describe in reasonable detail, and not by reference to the complaint or other document, the act or acts enjoined or restrained;....”

This rule represents a departure from prior North Carolina practice. See 2 A. McIntosh, North Carolina Practice and…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Pruitt v. WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  2. Setzer v. AnnasSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  3. Pruitt v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1975
  4. Setzer v. AnnasCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Spencer v. SpencerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
  2. Hopper v. MasonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
  3. Carolyn Louise Gunn Testamentary Tr. v. BumgardnerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2021
  4. Carolyn Louise Gunn Testamentary Tr. v. BumgardnerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2021
  5. Invue SEC. Prods., Inc. v. SteinNorth Carolina Business Court · 2017

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API