Couch v. Private Diagnostic Clinic
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Per curiam
Justice Freeman did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case. The remaining six members of the Court are of the opinion that plaintiffs counsel, Ms. Maria P. Sperando, engaged in a grossly improper jury argument that included at least nineteen explicit characterizations of the defense witnesses and opposing counsel as liars. The trial court did not sustain defendant’s initial objection to this jury argument, nor did the trial court thereafter intervene ex mero motu to correct the grossly improper argument.
All members of the Court are of the opinion that the trial court…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- James v. RogersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
- Hayes v. Town of FairmontSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1999
3Cited by18 opinions
- State v. JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2002
- State Properties, LLC v. RayCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
- State v. RogersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2002
- Couch v. Private Diagnostic ClinicCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
- State v. HueySupreme Court of North Carolina · 2017
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.