Summary
stating that a published opinion of the Court of Appeals was without precedential value where the Court was "divided three to two as to the result and thus there being no majority of the Court"
Summary of this case from Mole v. City of DurhamOpinion
No. 412A86
Filed 6 January 1987
Appeal and Error 64 absence of majority vote — Court of Appeals decision undisturbed Where two members of the Supreme Court did not participate in the consideration or decision of a case, the remaining members of the Court are divided three to two, and there is thus no majority of the Court voting to either affirm or reverse, the decision of the Court of Appeals is left undisturbed and stands without precedential value. Justices WEBB and WHICHARD did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.
APPEAL by plaintiff-appellant from a decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals reported at 81 N.C. App. 121, 343 S.E.2d 607 (1986), reversing an award of the North Carolina Industrial Commission entered in I.C. File No. 715130 and remanding the case for further order of the Commission. Heard in the Supreme Court 9 December 1986.
Bridges, Bridges Morgan, P.A., by Forrest Donald Bridges, for plaintiff-appellant.
Caudle Spears, P.A., by Lloyd C. Caudle and Richard S. Guy, for defendant-appellees.
Justices Webb and Whichard took no part in the consideration or determination of this case. The remaining members of this Court being divided three to two as to the result and thus there being no majority of the Court voting to either affirm or reverse, the decision of the Court of Appeals is left undisturbed and stands without precedential value.
Affirmed.
Justices WEBB and WHICHARD did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.