Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Robinson

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided August 21, 2001No. COA00-0047Published

1DissentWynn, Judge

Because I believe that the trial court failed to make adequate findings of fact and conclusions of law to support its order denying surety’s petition to remit forfeiture of the bond, I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion.

Our Rules of Civil Procedure require the trial court, at a minimum, to “make brief, definite, pertinent findings and conclusions upon the contested matters. A finding of such essential facts as lay a basis for the decision is sufficient.” State v. Rakina and State v. Zofira, 49 N.C. App. 537, 540-41, 272 S.E.2d 3, 5 (1980), disc. review denied, 302 N.C. 221, 277…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. VikreCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
  2. State v. RakinaCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  3. State v. HorneCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984

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

Powered by the Exa API