Costin v. Shell
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
BECTON, Judge.
In applying the standard for summary judgment, the trial court found, based on the pleadings and affidavits, that no genuine issue existed as to any material fact. See Loy v. Lorm, 52 N.C. App. 428, 278 S.E. 2d 897 (1981). Our view of the record is in accord with the findings and judgment of the trial court.
G.S. 90-202.3 makes it unlawful for any person to “practice podiatry unless he shall have been first licensed and registered so to do in the manner provided in this Article [Article 12 — Podiatrists] . . . .” Podiatry under the Article is defined as “the surgical or medical…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Loy v. Lorm Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
- Builders Supplies Co. of Goldsboro, NC, Inc. v. GaineySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
- Rape v. LyerlySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
3Cited by8 opinions
- Sunbelt Rentals, Inc. v. Head & Engquist Equipment, L.L.C.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
- Taylor v. North Carolina Department of TransportationCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
- Sunbelt Rentals, Inc. v. Head & Engquist Equipment, L.L.C.North Carolina Business Court · 2003
- Hamlet HMA, Inc. v. Richmond CountyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
- Daugherty v. Cherry HospitalNorth Carolina Industrial Commission · 2007
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.