Legal Opinion

Poor v. Hill

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided May 16, 2000No. COA98-1494PublishedCited by 338 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JOHN, Judge.

At the outset, we observe that the appeals of both plaintiffs and defendants are subject to dismissal, see Northwood Homeowners Assn. v. Town of Chapel Hill, 112 N.C. App. 630, 632, 436 S.E.2d 282, 283 (1993), in that the parties’ appellate briefs violate the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure (the Rules) by failing to support their respective summary of the facts with sufficient “references to pages in the transcript of proceedings, the record on appeal, or exhibits,” N.C.R. App. P. 28(b)(4). Notwithstanding, in view of the errors identified herein, we elect in our…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. Marshall v. MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  2. United Laboratories, Inc. v. KuykendallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
  3. Johnson v. Phoenix Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  4. Dickinson v. PakeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  5. Spartan Leasing Inc. v. PollardCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1991

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

3Cited by338 opinions

  1. Toomer v. GarrettCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
  2. Carcano v. JBSS, LLCCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009
  3. Lake Mary Ltd. Partnership v. JohnstonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
  4. McLamb v. T.P., Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
  5. Schlieper v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009

333 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