In Re Baby Boy Shamp
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
HEDRICK, Chief Judge.
By Assignments of Error Nos. 3 and 4, the respondents, appellants, the Department and the guardian ad litem, contend that the trial court erred “by failing to dismiss the case which was patently devoid of proper service of process so that personal jurisdiction was lacking.” Respondents argue the trial court lacked personal jurisdiction because the parents did not have summons issued and served upon the parties in accordance with G.S. 1A-1, Rule 4. Respondents’ contentions are without merit.
This adoption proceeding was instituted when prospective adopting parents filed a…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Ragsdale v. KennedySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
- Concrete Service Corp. v. Investors Group, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
- Williams v. . WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- Harris v. WaldenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
- Concrete Service Corp. v. Investors Group, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Broussard v. Meineke Discount Muffler Shops, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1998
- Rowan County Board of Education v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1992
- Matthew Strum v. Exxon Company, Usa, a Division of Exxon Corporation Exxon CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1994
- TSC RESEARCH, LLC v. Bayer Chemicals Corp.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2008
- Leftwich v. GainesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.