Opinion
Smith, Patterson, Follin, Curtis, Jamess&sHarkavy, Raleigh, for defendant.
William W. Aycock, Jr., Tarboro, for plaintiff.
Defendant's petition for discretionary review under G.S. § 7A-31, 53 N.C.App. 663, 281 S.E.2d 777. Denied.
Smith, Patterson, Follin, Curtis, Jamess&sHarkavy, Raleigh, for defendant.
William W. Aycock, Jr., Tarboro, for plaintiff.
Defendant's petition for discretionary review under G.S. § 7A-31, 53 N.C.App. 663, 281 S.E.2d 777. Denied.
remanding for specific findings
Summary of this case from Jerson v. JersonFull title:PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina
Date published: Jan 12, 1982
Alternatively, they argue that the trial court should have relieved them of the stipulation because it was…
Poythress v. Libbey-Owens Ford Co.Plaintiff argues the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to hear such evidence. In Thomas v. Poole,…