Driver v. Burlington Aviation, Inc.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
MARTIN, Judge.
Initially, we note that plaintiffs have appealed from an interlocutory order. Judge Allen’s order dismisses plaintiffs’ action against Cessna, but does not dispose of plaintiffs’ claims against Burlington Aviation, nor does the order contain a certification that “there is no just reason for delay” as required by G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 54(b) for entry of a final judgment affecting fewer than all of the claims or parties. As a general rule, no appeal lies from an interlocutory order. Auction Co. v. Myers, 40 N.C. App. 570, 253 S.E.2d 362 (1979). However, G.S. §§ 1-277 and 7A-27(d)…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Sutton v. DukeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
- Dickens v. PuryearSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
- Harris v. NCNB National Bank of North CarolinaCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
- Johnson v. Ruark Obstetrics & Gynecology Associates, P.A.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1990
- Woodson v. RowlandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1991
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Colgan Air, Inc. v. Raytheon Aircraft Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2007
- Bryant v. AdamsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994
- Acosta v. ByrumCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2006
- Caldwell v. Enstrom Helicopter Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- Brinkman v. Barrett Kays & Associates, P.A.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2003
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.