Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 North Carolina opinions name it 1 courts 2008–2026 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by North Carolina courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Piazza v. Kirkbridegreen1 sentence2026See Piazza v. Kirkbride, 246 N.C. App. 576, 595 (2016), aff’d as modified on other grounds, 372 N.C. 137 (2019) (“This appeal arises from a final judgment. | 1 | 1 |
Piazza v. Kirkbridegreen1 sentence2026See Piazza v. Kirkbride, 246 N.C. App. 576, 595 (2016), aff’d as modified on other grounds, 372 N.C. 137 (2019) (“This appeal arises from a final judgment. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Melton
green
1 sentence2026“Rule 10(a)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure[,]” however, “provides that, in a criminal case, to preserve an issue concerning the sufficiency of the State’s evidence, the defendant must make ‘a motion to dismiss the action . . . at trial.’” State v. Golder, 374 N.C. 238 , 245 (2020) (quoting N.C. R. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
State v. Gordon
neutral
1 sentence2025Jurisdiction This Court has jurisdiction to hear an appeal from the final judgment of a superior court pursuant to N.C.G.S. §§ 7A-27(b) and 15A-1444(a) (2023). 1 “The term ‘Allen charge’ is derived from the case of Allen v. United States, in which the United States Supreme Court approved the use of jury instructions that encouraged the jury to reach a verdict, if possible, after the jury requested additional instructions from the trial court.” State v. Gordon, 278 N.C. App. 119 , 122 (2021) (citation omitted). -6- III. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
State v. Stubbs
green
2 sentences2015Following such direction, the General Assembly has stated that the Court of Appeals ‘has jurisdiction . . . to issue the prerogative writs, including mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and supersedeas, in aid of its own jurisdiction, or to supervise and control the proceedings of any of the trial courts of the General Court of Justice.’ N.C.G.S. § 7A-32(c) (2014).” Id. at 42, 770 S.E.2d at 75-76 . 2015Following such direction, the General Assembly has stated that the Court of Appeals 'has jurisdiction ... to issue the prerogative writs, including mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and supersedeas, in aid of its own jurisdiction, or to supervise and control the proceedings of any of the trial courts of the General Court of Justice.' N.C.G.S. § 7A-32(c) (2014)." Id. at 42, 770 S.E.2d at 75 -76 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
In re T.H.T.
green
2 sentences2014In re T.H.T., 362 N.C. at 456 , 665 S.E.2d at 60-61 . 2014In re T.H.T., 362 N.C. at 456 , 665 S.E.2d at 60-61 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Gunter
green
2 sentences2008Therefore, we held that even though the case “was properly under the jurisdiction of the district court and not the superior court when the citation was issued,” id. at 624, 433 S.E.2d at 193 , the subsequent presentment by the grand jury brought the action “properly within the jurisdiction of the superior court pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-271(a)(2).” Id. at 625, 433 S.E.2d at 194 . 2008Therefore, we held that even though the case “was properly under the jurisdiction of the district court and not the superior court when the citation was issued,” id. at 624, 433 S.E.2d at 193 , the subsequent presentment by the grand jury brought the action “properly within the jurisdiction of the superior court pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-271(a)(2).” Id. at 625, 433 S.E.2d at 194 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.