Civil Practice – Appeals – Entry of Judgment — Grounds

Civil Practice – Appeals – Entry of Judgment — Grounds (access required)

Blueridge General, Inc. v. Currituck County By letter of May 14, 2010, the trial judge informed the parties that he intended to grant plaintiff’s motion for relief from his Sept. 1, 2009 order dismissing plaintiff’s complaint. This letter did not constitute even the rendition of judgment, much less an entry of judgment. Since the letter was never filed with the clerk of court, the judge’s “ruling” in the letter was of no effect and was ultimately displaced by entry of a Sept. 20, 2011 order denying plaintiff’s motion for relief.

Login required


You have clicked on a link to information that is exclusive to NC Lawyers Weekly subscribers.

	Email Address: Password:	Already a paid subscriber but not registered for online access yet? For instructions on how to get premium web access, click here. Forgot Password?

Interested in Subscribing?

Start by choosing how you'd like your news delivered.

- Print and Digital -

- Digital Only -

POST A COMMENT

Comments are closed.

Most Important Opinions

Workers’ Compensation – Change of Condition – Insufficient Showing – Doctor’s Testimony (access required)

Wilhite v. Pike Electric, Inc. Although plaintiff’s doctor agreed with plaintiff’s counsel’s assertion that plaintiff was “100 percent” disabled, the doctor’s opinion on this point was not based solely upon plaintiff’s medical condition – which the doctor said was unchanged – or on the doctor’s medical expertise; rather, the doctor agreed with counsel’s assessment based on the doctor’s consideration of plaintiff’s “skill set and educational background.”

Contract – Used Car Purchase – Allegedly Forged Signature – Ratification – Attorney’s Fees – No Statutory Basis (access required)

Huff v. CBS Quality Cars, Inc. Since the trial court found that plaintiff signed the bill of sale and ratified the financing contract by accepting the car, driving it, and making payments on it for several months, the court was not required to make a finding of fact regarding whether plaintiff’s signature on the financing contract had been forged.

Criminal Practice – No Due Process Claim from Contraband Cigarette Sting (access required)

U.S. v. Hasan The sale of untaxed cigarettes by government agents during a two-year investigation of trafficking in contraband cigarettes was not so “outrageous” and “shocking” as to violate defendant’s right to due process, and the 4th Circuit affirms his convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 371 and § 2342(a).