green
Positive treatment
1.8 score
Treatment trajectory · 1979 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1979
2002
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
J. M. Heinike Associates, Inc. v. Vesce
App. 337 , 256 S.E. 2d 500 , disc. rev. denied, 298 N.C. 304 , 259 S.E. 2d 300 (1979). “[A] witness may not arbitrarily refuse to testify without existence in fact of a real danger, it being for the court to determine whether that real danger exists.” Id. at 339, 256 S.E. 2d at 502 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Matter of Stradford
See In re Mental Health Center, 42 N.C.App. 292, 296 , 256 S.E.2d 818, 821 (court has inherent power to take action necessary to "fulfill their assigned mission of administering justice efficiently and promptly"), disc. rev. denied, 298 N.C. 297 , 259 S.E.2d 298 (1979); see also In re Will of Hester, 320 N.C. 738, 741 , 360 S.E.2d 801, 804 (defining inherent power to include "broad discretionary powers sufficient to meet the circumstances of each case"), reh'g denied, 321 N.C. 300 , 362 S.E.2d 780 (1987); Hicks-Bey v. United States, 649 A.2d 569, 574-75 (D.C.App.1994) (trial court had inherent…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
John C. KIRKMAN, Jr., Thomas L. Kirkman and Lina Kirkman Hamilton
v.
Minnie H. KIRKMAN.
v.
Minnie H. KIRKMAN.
Supreme Court of North Carolina.
Sep 25, 1979.
Published
Nancy Fields Fadum, for plaintiffs.
Randall, Yaeger & Woodson, E. C. Harris, for defendant.
Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. § 7A-31. 42 N.C.App. 173, 256 S.E.2d 264. Denied.