From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Coker v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Apr 7, 2006
360 N.C. 398 (N.C. 2006)

Opinion

No. 532A05.

Filed April 7, 2006.

Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 172 N.C. App. ___, 617 S.E.2d 306 (2005), affirming an order and opinion dismissing plaintiffs' amended complaint entered on 5 January 2004 by Judge Ben F. Tennille in Superior Court, Rowan County. Heard in the Supreme Court 16 March 2006.

Wallace Graham, P.A., by Cathy A. Williams and Mona Lisa Wallace; Wyrick Robbins Yates Ponton LLP, by K. Edward Greene; and Shipman Wright, L.L.P., by Gary K. Shipman, for plaintiff-appellants. Smith Moore LLP, by Sidney S. Eagles, Jr. and Allison O. Van Laningham, and Bush Seyferth Kethledge Paige PLLC, by Raymond M. Kethledge, for defendant-appellee. Jonathan Wall, Counsel for the North Carolina Academy of Trial Lawyers, amicus curiae. Womble Carlyle Sandridge Rice, PLLC, by Burley B. Mitchell, Jr. and Sean E. Andrussier, for the National Association of Manufacturers and the American Tort Reform Association, amici curiae.


AFFIRMED.

Justice MARTIN did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.


Summaries of

Coker v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Apr 7, 2006
360 N.C. 398 (N.C. 2006)
Case details for

Coker v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.

Case Details

Full title:JAMES AND CHARLOTTE COKER, ROBERT AND REBECCA DARCONTE, AND DONALD AND…

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Apr 7, 2006

Citations

360 N.C. 398 (N.C. 2006)

Citing Cases

Comm. to Elect Dan Forest v. Emps. Political Action Comm.

39A, Plaintiff was required to meet two separate burdens: (1) prove that it was a party authorized to bring…

Woodring v. Swieter

"`If a party does not have standing to bring a claim, a court has no subject matter jurisdiction to hear the…