Hill v. Cox
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
WALKER, Judge.
I
In the first action before this Court, the law firm, on behalf of those caveators it represented, alleges that the trial court abused its discretion by denying their petition for approval and award of legal expenses filed on 26 April 1991. They argue that the caveat proceeding had substantial merit, and the trial court’s decision to deny them reasonable fees was arbitrary and unreasonable. We agree.
N.C.G.S. § 6-21(2) authorizes the trial court, in its discretion, to allow attorney fees to counsel for unsuccessful caveators where the proceeding has substantial merit. The purpose…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Lemon v. KurtzmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- State v. TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
- State Highway Commission v. HemphillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
- State v. PayneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
- In Re the Purported Will of AndrewsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Doe v. Diocese RaleighCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2015
- In re: DuvallCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2019
- Lippard v. HollemanCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2020
- Lippard v. HollemanCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2020