RSS

Tag Archive | "Highlights"

Highlights of this week’s opinion digests: Dec. 23, 2010

Thursday, December 23, 2010

0 Comments

First impression   The N.C. Supreme Court decides that judicial estoppel trumps the statute of frauds in Powell v. City of Newton, a case in which a litigant agreed to settle by quitclaiming his interest in land in exchange for money. Although the litigant later refused to sign the deed, his statements to the trial [...]

Continue reading...

Highlights of this week’s opinion digests: Nov. 19, 2010

Friday, November 19, 2010

0 Comments

The N.C. Court of Appeals issued two first-impression decisions this week:   The statute which tolls the statute of limitations for military personnel while they are on active duty not only allows military personnel more time to file personal-injury claims against others, but it also gives others, like the plaintiff in Beaver v. Fountain, more [...]

Continue reading...

Highlights of this week’s opinion digests

Friday, October 15, 2010

0 Comments

First impression   Satellite-based monitoring of sex offenders is a civil regulatory program and not punishment; therefore, it does not violate the ex post facto clauses of the federal and state constitutions to apply the satellite-based monitoring statutes to sex offenders who, like the defendants in State v. Bowditch, committed their crimes before passage of [...]

Continue reading...

Highlights of this week’s opinion digests

Friday, September 10, 2010

0 Comments

First impression All of these decisions are from the N.C. Court of Appeals.   The choice-of-law rule, lex loci delicti, applies not only in personal tort cases, but also in the business arena, as in the negligent accounting case of Hardo National Insurance Co. v. Grant Thornton LLP.   In the personal-jurisdiction case of Bauer [...]

Continue reading...

Highlights of this week’s opinion digests

Friday, August 20, 2010

0 Comments

First impression These are all N.C. Court of Appeals decisions. Construing a revised G.S. § 7A-305 for the first time, the Court of Appeals continues to read the statute along with G.S. § 7A-314. Expert witness fees are included in costs in Jarrell v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hospital Authority because the experts were subpoenaed. Although the subpoenas [...]

Continue reading...