Legal Opinion

Rustad v. Rustad

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided April 17, 1984No. 8321DC523PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAUGHN, Chief Judge.

I

The first question we consider on appeal is whether the trial court had jurisdiction to hear plaintiffs motion in light of the parties’ contractual agreement to submit disputes regarding spousal and child support to mediation and arbitration. For reasons set forth below, we hold that the trial court had such jurisdiction.

The parties in this case entered into a separation agreement in 1979, which included therein provisions for custody and support. Said agreement also contained a provision that all future disputes arising out of or relating to the contract would be…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Fuchs v. FuchsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
  2. Falls v. FallsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
  3. Crutchley v. CrutchleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  4. Crutchley v. CrutchleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  5. Sims v. Ritter Construction, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Spencer v. SpencerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1985
  2. Brandt v. BrandtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988
  3. Jackson v. JacksonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API