Legal Opinion

Sainz v. Sainz

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided June 20, 1978No. 7712SC446PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BROCK, Chief Judge.

As a preliminary matter, we note that the trial court purported to make findings of fact and conclusions of law in its order. The words of Judge Morris in a recent opinion are pertinent:

“At the outset we feel compelled again to point out that it is not a part of the function of the court on a motion for summary judgment to make findings of fact and conclusions of law .... Granted, in rare situations it can be helpful for the trial court to set out the undisputed facts which form the basis for his judgment. When that appears helpful or necessary, the court should let the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Sistare v. SistareSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
  2. Mitchell v. MitchellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  3. Capps v. City of RaleighCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
  4. Stanley v. . StanleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
  5. Armstrong, Cator & Co. v. BestSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Hayes v. BeresfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
  2. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh v. GreeneCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1999
  3. Atlantic Coast Conference v. University of MarylandCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2013
  4. City of Philadelphia v. BauerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1984
  5. Bart Dalton v. Carol DaltonTexas Supreme Court · 2018

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

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

Powered by the Exa API