 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| State v. Morgan, NO. COA06-1234,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA, May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Enough evidence supported defendants' first-degree kidnapping convictions, under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-39 (2005), because two bound victims were put in more danger than was inherent in armed robberies defendants were convicted of, and defendants did not affirmatively "release" the victims. A defendant's involvement in other robberies was admissible.
|
|||||
| State v. Reinhardt, NO. COA06-59,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA, May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment was vacated as probation could not be extended after it expired under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1344(d), and there was not finding of reasonable effort to notify defendant and to conduct extension hearing earlier. As first court lacked jurisdiction to extend probation, later court lacked jurisdiction to revoke it.
|
|||||
| State v. Roberts, NO. COA06-877,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA, May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State v. Roland, NO. COA06-634,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA, May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State v. Rushdan, NO. COA06-1229,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA, May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Convictions were affirmed because the trial judge did not prejudice defendant under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1222 by asking questions and clarifying the testimony of witnesses. Defendant received a fair trial as the judge did not express an opinion upon or bolster the testimony of any witness and did not prejudice defendant by clarifying testimony.
|
|||||
| Thornton v. F.J. Cherry Hosp. , NO. COA06-1096,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA, May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Patient's claim against a hospital and a state department under the North Carolina Tort Claims Act was denied because he failed to prove that the hospital staff had notice of alleged threats against the patient, presented no evidence of negligent conduct by any hospital employee, and failed to show the level of care that the hospital owed to him.
|
|||||
| WMS, Inc. v. Weaver, NO. COA06-723,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA, May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment against defendant corporation was properly declared satisfied in full as defendant's tender of check for total judgment less $715 plus 8 percent interest constituted a partial payment under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-239 and, thus, postjudgment interest did not accrue on the entire amount of the judgment when a second corrected check was issued.
|
|||||
| WRI/Raleigh, L.P. v. Shaikh, NO. COA06-784,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA, May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment was affirmed as doctrine of impossibility was inapplicable since new tenant had successfully installed grease trap. Frustration of purpose defense was properly presented to jury as investigation conducted after lease was signed revealed conditions that resulted in practically total destruction of expected value of performance.
|
|||||
| Wilson v. Wilson, NO. COA06-1147,
COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA, May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly imposed sanctions against an attorney pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, N.C. R. Civ. P. 11 (2005), because a charging lien filed by the attorney against the judgment of equitable distribution in favor of appellee in a divorce action failed to meet the legal sufficiency requirement of Rule 11.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
