EDMUNDS, Justice. In this case we consider whether a settlement agreement reached between the parties in open court and orally ratified by those parties before the judge, but never memorialized by a signed writing, is unenforceable as a violation of the statute of frauds. N.C.G.S. 22-2 (2009). Because successful invocation of the statute of frauds would allow plaintiff to evade a contractual obligation that he freely entered in open court, subverting the finality of such agreements and...
PARKER, Chief Justice. Plaintiffs Ron Medlin Construction and George Ronald Medlin appeal from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals affirming the trial court's entry of summary judgment for defendants on Ron Medlin Construction's claim for relief based on quantum meruit. For the reasons stated herein, we modify and affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals and remand this case to the Court of Appeals for further remand to the trial court for additional proceedings not...
NEWBY, Justice. In this case we must determine the validity of an adoption decree entered in the Durham County District Court at the request of Wilmington residents. If the decree is invalid, we must also determine whether defendant acted inconsistently with her constitutionally protected, paramount parental status. Because the General Assembly did not vest our courts with subject matter jurisdiction to create the type of adoption attempted here, we hold that the adoption decree at issue is...
NEWBY, Justice. This case presents the question whether the trial court erred by declaring defendant's individual retirement accounts ("IRAs") exempt from execution and by ordering that any future withdrawals from defendant's Fidelity IRAs comply with an escrow arrangement. We conclude that the trial court properly applied N.C.G.S. 1C-1601(a)(9) and acted within its broad equitable power. Therefore, we affirm the holding of the Court of Appeals that N.C.G.S. 1C-1601(a)(9) exempts defendant'...
MARTIN, Justice. This case presents the question of whether the Beaufort County School Board and its superintendent (defendants) violated state law by denying Viktoria King (plaintiff) access to alternative education during her long-term suspension from school. After considering longstanding precedent affording school officials discretion in administering student disciplinary codes and recent cases recognizing a state constitutional right to a sound basic education, we hold that defendants...
PER CURIAM. Justice TIMMONS-GOODSON took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. The remaining members of the Court are equally divided, with three members voting to affirm and three members voting to reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals. Accordingly, the decision of the Court of Appeals is left undisturbed and stands without precedential value. See, e.g., Formyduval v. Britt, 361 N.C. 215, 639 S.E.2d 443 (2007); Pitts v. Am. Sec. Ins. Co., 356 N.C. 292, 569 S.E....
BRADY, Justice. This case requires us to determine whether the 2004 amendment to N.C.G.S. 14-415.1, which prohibits convicted felons from possessing any firearm in any location, violates state and federal constitutional protections against ex post facto laws or is an unconstitutional bill of attainder. We hold that the amended statute is not an impermissible ex post facto law or bill of attainder. Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND...
PER CURIAM. For the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion, we reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals holding that defendant has a duty to defend plaintiff in the underlying action at issue. We affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals vacating the portion of the trial court's order of summary judgment that found defendant has a duty to indemnify plaintiff in the underlying action. This case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for further remand to the Superior Court, Mecklenburg...
The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 16th of December 2010 by State of NC for Temporary Stay: "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 17th of December 2010."
The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 25th of November 2009 by Plaintiff-Appellee to Dismiss Appeal: "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 15th of December 2010."
ORDER Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by Plaintiff-Appellant on the 20th of September 2010 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30 (substantial constitutional question), the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the notice of appeal is "Dismissed ex mero motu by order of the Court in conference, this the 15th of December 2010." Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 20th...
ORDER Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 8th of October 2010 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 15th of December 2010."
The following order has been entered on the motion to Dismiss Appeal filed on the 30th of August 2010 by Defendants: "Motion Dismissed Without Prejudice to Refile in Trial Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 15th of December 2010."
The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 5th of April 2010 by Defendant/Third Party-Plaintiffs for Extension of Time to File Reply Briefs: "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 15th of December 2010."
ORDER Upon consideration of the petition filed on he 23rd of August 2010 by Plaintiffs in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 15th of December 2010."
ORDER Upon consideration of the conditional petition filed on the 30th of August 2010 by Defendants in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: "Dismissed as Moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 15th of December 2010."
ORDER Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 4th of August 2010 by Plaintiff in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 15th of December 2010."
ORDER Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 9th of November 2010 in this matter for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 prior to a determination by the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 15th of December 2010."
