 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Banc of Am. Secs., LLC v. Evergreen Int'l Aviation, Inc., 03 CVS 9138,
NORTH CAROLINA SUPERIOR COURT, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, January 25, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: LLC's motion to compel production of client's documents that were privileged under attorney-client privilege was denied as client had not put advice of attorneys directly in issue in fraud and negligent misrepresentation claims and while documents might be relevant, relevance was not standard for determining whether documents were protected.
|
|||||
| In re Anderson, No. 448PA04,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA, January 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Decision of the intermediate appellate court was reversed and remanded because a putative father's consent to the adoption of his minor child was not required, pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 48-3-601(2)(b)(4)(II), as the father's mere offers of support were insufficient under the statute to require the consent of the father to the adoption.
|
|||||
| McCutchen v. McCutchen, No. 308A05,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA, January 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Ex-wife's claim for alienation of affections was not barred by statute of limitations under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-52(5). While parties separated more than three years before suit was brought, allegation that husband expressed his desire to return to marriage after separation presented issue of fact as to whether alienation occurred upon separation.
|
|||||
| Nolan v. Village of Marvin, No. 488A05,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA, January 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court erred in affirming trial court's decision that upheld village's annexation ordinance; since village's annexation ordinance did not provide for meaningful extension of municipal services to lots subject to annexation, village had not complied with statutory annexation procedures set forth in N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 160A-33 to 160A-42.
|
|||||
| O & M Indus. v. Smith Eng'g Co., No. 502PA04,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA, January 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court erred in finding questions concerning sufficiency of retained funds and the manufacturer's cost to complete its project were relevant, and, thus, precluded a grant of summary judgment to the product supplier pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, N.C. R. Civ. P. 56(c), as those matters did not raise genuine issues of material fact.
|
|||||
| State v. Berryman, No. 302A05,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA, January 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant failed to meet burden of showing six-year delay in preparation of trial transcript for appellate review violated constitutional or statutory right to appeal; record included evidence defense counsel made nine inquiries to court reporter regarding transcript during first two years, but there was gap during which no inquiries were made.
|
|||||
| State v. Hurst, No. 363A04,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA, January 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since the evidence supported the trial court's finding that none of the 12 jurors selected for the sitting panel were in the jury room by the time a newspaper article regarding the trial appeared there, defendant had not shown the substantial and irreparable harm required by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1061 for declaration of a mistrial.
|
|||||
| State v. McNeill, No. 615A03,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA, January 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State presented sufficient evidence, including defendant's disregard of victim's plea for life, to support submission of heinous, atrocious, or cruel (HAC) aggravating circumstance to jury. Prosecutor's recitation of portion of HAC pattern instruction was not gross error but aided jury in understanding types of murders in which HAC could be found.
|
|||||
| Flick Mortg. Investors v. Epiphany Mortg., 04-CVS-22296, 04-CVS-22297, 04-CVS-22298, 04-CVS-22299,
NORTH CAROLINA SUPERIOR COURT, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, February 1, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the attorney worked at the small law firm that represented plaintiff and then opened his own office and was hired by defendant and where the attorney had some involvement with the case while working with the law firm representing plaintiff, the attorney was disqualified as defendant's counsel under N.C. Rev. R. Prof. Conduct 1.9(a).
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
