From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ponder v. Been

Supreme Court of North Carolina.
Mar 11, 2022
380 N.C. 570 (N.C. 2022)

Opinion

No. 70A21

03-11-2022

Mark W. PONDER v. Stephen R. BEEN

Sodoma Law, by Amy Simpson, for plaintiff-appellant. James, McElroy & Diehl, P.A., Charlotte, by Preston O. Odom, III, and Claire Samuels Law, PLLC, by Claire J. Samuels, Charlotte, for defendant-appellee.


Sodoma Law, by Amy Simpson, for plaintiff-appellant.

James, McElroy & Diehl, P.A., Charlotte, by Preston O. Odom, III, and Claire Samuels Law, PLLC, by Claire J. Samuels, Charlotte, for defendant-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

For the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion, the decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed.

REVERSED.


Summaries of

Ponder v. Been

Supreme Court of North Carolina.
Mar 11, 2022
380 N.C. 570 (N.C. 2022)
Case details for

Ponder v. Been

Case Details

Full title:Mark W. PONDER v. Stephen R. BEEN

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Date published: Mar 11, 2022

Citations

380 N.C. 570 (N.C. 2022)
869 S.E.2d 193

Citing Cases

Toshiba Glob. Commerce Sols. v. Smart & Final Stores LLC

, rev'd per curiam for reasons stated in the dissent , 380 N.C. 570, 2022-NCSC-24, 869 S.E.2d 193 ; Eluhu v.…

Hundley v. AutoMoney, Inc.

If the trial court's findings of fact are supported by competent evidence in the record, then we must affirm…