Legal Opinion · Dissent

Goldston v. State

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 15, 2006No. 328PA04-2Published

1DissentChief Justice Parker

In my view, plaintiffs lack standing to maintain an action under the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, N.C.G.S. §§ 1-253 to -267.

This Court has noted that jurisdiction under the Declaratory Judgment Act

may be invoked “only in a case in which there is an actual or real existing controversy between parties having adverse interests in the matter in dispute.” Lide v. Mears, 231 N.C. 111, 56 S.E.2d 404, and cases cited. It must appear that “a real controversy, arising out of their opposing contentions as to their respective legal rights and liabilities under a deed, will or contract in writing, or…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Corum v. University of North CarolinaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1992
  2. In Re Inquiry Concerning a Judge No. 53 PeoplesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
  3. North Carolina Consumers Power, Inc. v. Duke Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  4. Lide v. MearsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  5. Gaston Board of Realtors, Inc. v. HarrisonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984

25 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