North Carolina Lawyers Weekly

Where the trial court determined that “[t]here has not been a substantial change in circumstances since the entry of the [2018 custody order] that would warrant modification at this time,” the trial court erred when it nevertheless modified the parties’ ...

The trial court’s denial of petitioner’s many motions aimed at forestalling arbitration is interlocutory. Although petitioner asserts the risk of inconsistent verdicts and raises interesting issues as to whether arbitration is appropriate, none of these issues will be waived, nor ...

The operating agreement for the plaintiff-limited liability company does not contain a rule of equal dignities, requiring amendments thereto to be in writing. As a result, defendants’ forecasted evidence—(1) that defendant Smith was induced to leave another sports agency to ...

Even if the time for filing an upset bid in a foreclosure action is considered a period of limitation, the Chief Justice’s emergency extension of “periods of limitation” to the close of business on 31 July 2020—even considering an emergency ...

After the North Carolina plaintiff went to Virginia to buy the Virginia defendants’ horse, “Fred,” defendant Allyson Coluccio added the following language to the parties’ contract: “As per my agreement upon arrival at Paramount Show Stables 3417 Old Milburnie Rd. ...

Before allowing defendant to proceed to trial pro se, the trial judge indicated that he had advised defendant of all permissible punishments; however, defendant was only so advised prior to being indicted as a habitual felon. Thereafter, defendant agreed that ...

At the front of a line of jurors waiting to ask the trial judge to defer service due to hardship or other excuses, juror Wallace said, “When this took place I stayed three quarters of a mile or so down ...

Because the habitual larceny indictments against defendant were not required, by statute or precedent, to allege any facts as to whether defendant was represented by counsel or had waived counsel during any of his prior four larceny convictions, the lack ...

Even though defendant was indicted for sexual offense with a child in violation of G.S. § 14-27.4A, and even though that statute was not enacted until several years after the events alleged in the indictment, since the indictment alleged all ...

The state presented evidence to contradict defendant’s claims of self-defense and defense of habitation through the testimony of witness Jeffery Struckman, who testified that (1) he was invited to defendant’s home by defendant’s brother, Berry; (2) defendant was acting erratically ...