Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Christie v. Hartley Construction, Inc.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided July 16, 2013No. COA12-1385Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

HUNTER, JR., Robert N., Judge,

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

I agree "with the majority that the trial court correctly granted *289summary judgment on all claims against Hartley and the claims against GrailCoat, with the exception of the breach of express warranties claim. I do not agree with the majority that Roemer v. Preferred Roofing, 190 N.C. App. 813, 660 S.E.2d 920 (2008), together with the routine application of the requirement that one panel of the court of appeals may not overrule another, In Re Civil Penalty, 324 N.C. 373, 384, 379 S.E.2d 30, 37 (1989), dictates the result…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. In Re the Appeal From the Civil PenaltySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
  2. Roemer v. Preferred Roofing, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2008

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

Powered by the Exa API