ruling error (North Carolina) · Go Syfert
← North Carolina issues

ruling error in North Carolina

25 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1889–2024 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.

Followed or applied (5)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Dorsettgreen
nc · 1967 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022
2 sentences

2022T.J. 2022-NCSC-23 Opinion of the Court declined to rule on th[e] question.” 272 N.C. 227, 229 (1967). ¶ 53 Here, plaintiff properly raised and received a ruling on her claim that it would be unconstitutional to deny relief under N.C.G.S.

2022T.J. 2022-NCSC-23 Opinion of the Court declined to rule on th[e] question.” 272 N.C. 227, 229 (1967). ¶ 53 Here, plaintiff properly raised and received a ruling on her claim that it would be unconstitutional to deny relief under N.C.G.S.

22
Brooks v. Goodengreen
ncctapp · 1984 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1990–2004
2 sentences

2004Brooks, Com’r of Labor v. Gooden, 69 N.C.

1990App. 701, 707 , 318 S.E.2d 348, 352 (1984) (“counterclaim is in the nature of an independent proceeding and is not automatically determined by a ruling in the principle claim . . .”).

12
State Ex Rel. Commissioner of Insurance v. Integon Life Insurancegreen
ncctapp · 1975 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
2 sentences

2009Co., 28 N.C.App. 7, 11 , 220 S.E.2d 409, 412 (1975) (stating that "[a]n administrative agency has no power to promulgate rules and regulations which alter or add to the law it was set up to administer or which have the effect of substantive law") (citation omitted). [7] To be absolutely clear, we believe that an individual subject to satellite-based monitoring has the right, in an appropriate proceeding, to challenge the validity of specific provisions of the interim guidelines or contracts on the grounds that they violate state or federal law, including relevant provisions of the federal and

2009Co., 28 N.C.App. 7, 11 , 220 S.E.2d 409, 412 (1975) (stating that "[a]n administrative agency has no power to promulgate rules and regulations which alter or add to the law it was set up to administer or which have the effect of substantive law") (citation omitted). [7] To be absolutely clear, we believe that an individual subject to satellite-based monitoring has the right, in an appropriate proceeding, to challenge the validity of specific provisions of the interim guidelines or contracts on the grounds that they violate state or federal law, including relevant provisions of the federal and

11
State v. Greengreen
nc · 1978 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1986–1986
2 sentences

1986As this Court said in State v. Green, 296 N.C. 183, 188 , 250 S.E. 2d 197, 200-201 (1978): The credibility of a witness’s identification testimony is a matter for the jury’s determination, State v. Orr, 260 N.C. 177 , 132 S.E. 2d 334 (1963); State v. Bowman, 232 N.C. 374 , 61 S.E. 2d 107 (1950), and only in rare instances will credibility be a matter for the court’s determination.

1986As this Court said in State v. Green, 296 N.C. 183, 188 , 250 S.E. 2d 197, 200-201 (1978): The credibility of a witness’s identification testimony is a matter for the jury’s determination, State v. Orr, 260 N.C. 177 , 132 S.E. 2d 334 (1963); State v. Bowman, 232 N.C. 374 , 61 S.E. 2d 107 (1950), and only in rare instances will credibility be a matter for the court’s determination.

11
Stanback v. Stanbackgreen
nc · 1979 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1983–1983
2 sentences

1983When making a ruling under this rule, “the complaint must be viewed as admitted, and on that basis the court must determine as a matter of law whether the allegations state a claim for which relief may be granted.” Stanback v. Stanback, 297 N.C. 181, 185 , 254 S.E. 2d 611, 615 (1979); see also, W.

1983When making a ruling under this rule, “the complaint must be viewed as admitted, and on that basis the court must determine as a matter of law whether the allegations state a claim for which relief may be granted.” Stanback v. Stanback, 297 N.C. 181, 185 , 254 S.E. 2d 611, 615 (1979); see also, W.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (29)

CaseCitedYears
Andresen v. Eastern Realty Co. green
ncctapp · 1983
2 sentences

1986Andresen v. Eastern Realty Co., 60 N.C.App. 418 , 298 S.E.2d 764 (1983).

1986Andreson v. Eastern Realty Co., 60 N.C.

21986–1986
State v. Valentine green
nc · 2003
2 sentences

2024Defendant does not challenge these findings of fact on appeal and argues only that, “regardless of whether the trial court’s finding was based upon [Rule 803(24) or Rule 804(b)(5)], the ruling was in error because there were no findings whatsoever regarding the circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness of the statements sought to be admitted.” “The trial court is required to make findings of fact and conclusions of law when determining the trustworthiness of a hearsay statement.” Valentine, 357 N.C. at 518 .

2024In Valentine, “[t]he State concede[d] that the trial court erroneously failed to make the required findings of fact and conclusions of law[,]” and, “[b]ecause the trial court failed to determine whether the victim’s statements . . . contained equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness necessary for admission under the exceptions to the hearsay rule,” our Supreme Court “review[ed] the record and [made] [its] own determination.” Id. (marks omitted).

12024–2024
Webb Ex Rel. Bumgarner v. Nicholson green
ncctapp · 2006
2 sentences

2016An interlocutory order ruling on a motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c) based upon "sovereign immunity affects a substantial right and warrants immediate appellate review." Webb v. Nicholson , 178 N.C.App. 362 , 363, 634 S.E.2d 545 , 546 (2006) (citation omitted).

2016An interlocutory order ruling on a motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c) based upon "sovereign immunity affects a substantial right and warrants immediate appellate review." Webb v. Nicholson , 178 N.C.App. 362 , 363, 634 S.E.2d 545 , 546 (2006) (citation omitted).

12016–2016
State ex rel. Tennessee Department of Health & Environment green
ncctapp · 1986
1 sentence

1993State of Tennessee v. Environmental Management Comm., 78 N.C.

11993–1993
Dull v. North Carolina green
scotus · 1976
1 sentence

1990State v. Harrill, 289 N.C. 186 , 221 S.E.2d 325 , death sentence vacated, 428 U.S. 904 , 49 L.

11990–1990
Avery v. North Carolina green
scotus · 1976
1 sentence

1990State v. Harrill, 289 N.C. 186 , 221 S.E.2d 325 , death sentence vacated, 428 U.S. 904 , 49 L.

11990–1990
State v. Harrill green
nc · 1976
2 sentences

1990State v. Harrill, 289 N.C. 186 , 221 S.E.2d 325 , death sentence vacated, 428 U.S. 904 , 49 L.

1990State v. Harrill, 289 N.C. 186 , 221 S.E.2d 325 , death sentence vacated, 428 U.S. 904 , 49 L.

11990–1990
State v. Boles green
nc · 1957
2 sentences

1987But even if the ruling was error, it was not prejudicial error, because there is no indication whatever that defendant could have defended the case more effectively if he had known who the “cool face” was, see State v. Cameron, 283 N.C. 191 , 195 S.E. 2d 481 (1973); State v. Boles, 246 N.C. 83 , 97 S.E. 2d 476 (1957), and the contention is therefore overruled.

1987But even if the ruling was error, it was not prejudicial error, because there is no indication whatever that defendant could have defended the case more effectively if he had known who the “cool face” was, see State v. Cameron, 283 N.C. 191 , 195 S.E. 2d 481 (1973); State v. Boles, 246 N.C. 83 , 97 S.E. 2d 476 (1957), and the contention is therefore overruled.

11987–1987
State v. Cameron green
nc · 1973
2 sentences

1987But even if the ruling was error, it was not prejudicial error, because there is no indication whatever that defendant could have defended the case more effectively if he had known who the “cool face” was, see State v. Cameron, 283 N.C. 191 , 195 S.E. 2d 481 (1973); State v. Boles, 246 N.C. 83 , 97 S.E. 2d 476 (1957), and the contention is therefore overruled.

1987But even if the ruling was error, it was not prejudicial error, because there is no indication whatever that defendant could have defended the case more effectively if he had known who the “cool face” was, see State v. Cameron, 283 N.C. 191 , 195 S.E. 2d 481 (1973); State v. Boles, 246 N.C. 83 , 97 S.E. 2d 476 (1957), and the contention is therefore overruled.

11987–1987
State v. Orr green
nc · 1963
2 sentences

1986As this Court said in State v. Green, 296 N.C. 183, 188 , 250 S.E. 2d 197, 200-201 (1978): The credibility of a witness’s identification testimony is a matter for the jury’s determination, State v. Orr, 260 N.C. 177 , 132 S.E. 2d 334 (1963); State v. Bowman, 232 N.C. 374 , 61 S.E. 2d 107 (1950), and only in rare instances will credibility be a matter for the court’s determination.

1986As this Court said in State v. Green, 296 N.C. 183, 188 , 250 S.E. 2d 197, 200-201 (1978): The credibility of a witness’s identification testimony is a matter for the jury’s determination, State v. Orr, 260 N.C. 177 , 132 S.E. 2d 334 (1963); State v. Bowman, 232 N.C. 374 , 61 S.E. 2d 107 (1950), and only in rare instances will credibility be a matter for the court’s determination.

11986–1986
State v. Bowman green
nc · 1950
2 sentences

1986As this Court said in State v. Green, 296 N.C. 183, 188 , 250 S.E. 2d 197, 200-201 (1978): The credibility of a witness’s identification testimony is a matter for the jury’s determination, State v. Orr, 260 N.C. 177 , 132 S.E. 2d 334 (1963); State v. Bowman, 232 N.C. 374 , 61 S.E. 2d 107 (1950), and only in rare instances will credibility be a matter for the court’s determination.

1986As this Court said in State v. Green, 296 N.C. 183, 188 , 250 S.E. 2d 197, 200-201 (1978): The credibility of a witness’s identification testimony is a matter for the jury’s determination, State v. Orr, 260 N.C. 177 , 132 S.E. 2d 334 (1963); State v. Bowman, 232 N.C. 374 , 61 S.E. 2d 107 (1950), and only in rare instances will credibility be a matter for the court’s determination.

11986–1986
Clodfelter v. Carroll green
nc · 1964
2 sentences

1985Clodfelter v. Carroll, 261 N.C. 630 , 135 S.E. 2d 636 (1964).

1985Clodfelter v. Carroll, 261 N.C. 630 , 135 S.E. 2d 636 (1964).

11985–1985
Tridyn Industries, Inc. v. American Mutual Insurance green
nc · 1979
2 sentences

1983“Even if defendant is correct on its legal position, the most it will suffer from being denied an immediate appeal is a trial on the issue of damages.” Industries, 296 N.C. at 491 , 251 S.E. 2d at 447 .

1983“Even if defendant is correct on its legal position, the most it will suffer from being denied an immediate appeal is a trial on the issue of damages.” Industries, 296 N.C. at 491 , 251 S.E. 2d at 447 .

11983–1983
Lide v. Mears green
nc · 1949
2 sentences

1978We have said many times that "an action for a declaratory judgment will lie only in a case in which there is an actual or real existing controversy between parties *414 having adverse interests in the matter in dispute." Lide v. Mears, 231 N.C. 111 , 56 S.E.2d 404 (1949).

1978We have said many times that "an action for a declaratory judgment will lie only in a case in which there is an actual or real existing controversy between parties *414 having adverse interests in the matter in dispute." Lide v. Mears, 231 N.C. 111 , 56 S.E.2d 404 (1949).

11978–1978
State v. Williams green
nc · 1971
2 sentences

1975Defendant concedes that under the rule in State v. Williams, 279 N.C. 663 , 185 S.E.2d 174 (1971), the solicitor properly asked this question.

1975Defendant concedes that under the rule in State v. Williams, 279 N.C. 663 , 185 S.E.2d 174 (1971), the solicitor properly asked this question.

11975–1975
State v. Painter green
nc · 1965
2 sentences

1972The trial court has discretionary authority to permit leading questions in proper instances, State v. Painter, 265 N.C. 277 , 144 S.E. 2d 6 (1965), and upon defendant’s failure to show prejudice such discretionary action of the trial court will not be disturbed.

1972The trial court has discretionary authority to permit leading questions in proper instances, State v. Painter, 265 N.C. 277 , 144 S.E. 2d 6 (1965), and upon defendant’s failure to show prejudice such discretionary action of the trial court will not be disturbed.

11972–1972
State v. . Combs green
nc · 1931
2 sentences

1966G.S. 15-152; State v. Hamilton, 264 N.C. 277 , 141 S.E. 2d 506 ; State v. White, 256 N.C. 244 , 123 S.E. 2d 483 ; State v. Combs, 200 N.C. 671 , 158 S.E. 252 .

1966G.S. 15-152; State v. Hamilton, 264 N.C. 277 , 141 S.E. 2d 506 ; State v. White, 256 N.C. 244 , 123 S.E. 2d 483 ; State v. Combs, 200 N.C. 671 , 158 S.E. 252 .

11966–1966
State v. Hamilton green
nc · 1965
2 sentences

1966G.S. 15-152; State v. Hamilton, 264 N.C. 277 , 141 S.E. 2d 506 ; State v. White, 256 N.C. 244 , 123 S.E. 2d 483 ; State v. Combs, 200 N.C. 671 , 158 S.E. 252 .

1966G.S. 15-152; State v. Hamilton, 264 N.C. 277 , 141 S.E. 2d 506 ; State v. White, 256 N.C. 244 , 123 S.E. 2d 483 ; State v. Combs, 200 N.C. 671 , 158 S.E. 252 .

11966–1966
State v. White green
nc · 1962
2 sentences

1966G.S. 15-152; State v. Hamilton, 264 N.C. 277 , 141 S.E. 2d 506 ; State v. White, 256 N.C. 244 , 123 S.E. 2d 483 ; State v. Combs, 200 N.C. 671 , 158 S.E. 252 .

1966G.S. 15-152; State v. Hamilton, 264 N.C. 277 , 141 S.E. 2d 506 ; State v. White, 256 N.C. 244 , 123 S.E. 2d 483 ; State v. Combs, 200 N.C. 671 , 158 S.E. 252 .

11966–1966
Fulwood v. . Fulwood green
nc · 1913
2 sentences

1958The excluded returns not being a part of the record or before the court, Judge Mallard correctly ruled that the court could not “find that the exclusion” of the returns “was prejudical to the defendants.” In re Smith’s Will, 163 N.C. 464 , 79 S.E. 977 ; Fulwood v. Fulwood, 161 N.C. 601 , 77 S.E. 763 .

1958The excluded returns not being a part of the record or before the court, Judge Mallard correctly ruled that the court could not “find that the exclusion” of the returns “was prejudical to the defendants.” In re Smith’s Will, 163 N.C. 464 , 79 S.E. 977 ; Fulwood v. Fulwood, 161 N.C. 601 , 77 S.E. 763 .

11958–1958
In Re Will of Smith green
nc · 1913
2 sentences

1958The excluded returns not being a part of the record or before the court, Judge Mallard correctly ruled that the court could not “find that the exclusion” of the returns “was prejudical to the defendants.” In re Smith’s Will, 163 N.C. 464 , 79 S.E. 977 ; Fulwood v. Fulwood, 161 N.C. 601 , 77 S.E. 763 .

1958The excluded returns not being a part of the record or before the court, Judge Mallard correctly ruled that the court could not “find that the exclusion” of the returns “was prejudical to the defendants.” In re Smith’s Will, 163 N.C. 464 , 79 S.E. 977 ; Fulwood v. Fulwood, 161 N.C. 601 , 77 S.E. 763 .

11958–1958
Hildebrand v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co. green
nc · 1939
2 sentences

1955Co., 216 N.C. 235 , 4 S.E. 2d 439 ; Daniel v. Gardner, 240 N.C. 249 , 81 S.E. 2d 660 ), and' that the rulings of the Superior Court upon pre liminary motions relating to the ¡^leadings will not be held for error unless it be made to appear that the ruling to which exception is noted affects prejudicially some substantial right of the movant.

1955Co., 216 N.C. 235 , 4 S.E. 2d 439 ; Daniel v. Gardner, 240 N.C. 249 , 81 S.E. 2d 660 ), and' that the rulings of the Superior Court upon pre liminary motions relating to the ¡^leadings will not be held for error unless it be made to appear that the ruling to which exception is noted affects prejudicially some substantial right of the movant.

11955–1955
Sowers v. Home-Made Chair Co. neutral
nc · 1953
2 sentences

1955Sowers v. Chair Co., 238 N.C. 576 , 78 S.E. 2d 342 ; Ledford v. Transportation Co., 237 N.C. 317 , 74 S.E. 2d 653 ; Hinson v. Britt, supra. Barnette v. Woody, ante, 424.

1955Sowers v. Chair Co., 238 N.C. 576 , 78 S.E. 2d 342 ; Ledford v. Transportation Co., 237 N.C. 317 , 74 S.E. 2d 653 ; Hinson v. Britt, supra. Barnette v. Woody, ante, 424.

11955–1955
Daniel v. Gardner green
nc · 1954
2 sentences

1955Co., 216 N.C. 235 , 4 S.E. 2d 439 ; Daniel v. Gardner, 240 N.C. 249 , 81 S.E. 2d 660 ), and' that the rulings of the Superior Court upon pre liminary motions relating to the ¡^leadings will not be held for error unless it be made to appear that the ruling to which exception is noted affects prejudicially some substantial right of the movant.

1955Co., 216 N.C. 235 , 4 S.E. 2d 439 ; Daniel v. Gardner, 240 N.C. 249 , 81 S.E. 2d 660 ), and' that the rulings of the Superior Court upon pre liminary motions relating to the ¡^leadings will not be held for error unless it be made to appear that the ruling to which exception is noted affects prejudicially some substantial right of the movant.

11955–1955
Ledford v. Marion Transportation Co. green
nc · 1953
2 sentences

1955Sowers v. Chair Co., 238 N.C. 576 , 78 S.E. 2d 342 ; Ledford v. Transportation Co., 237 N.C. 317 , 74 S.E. 2d 653 ; Hinson v. Britt, supra. Barnette v. Woody, ante, 424.

1955Sowers v. Chair Co., 238 N.C. 576 , 78 S.E. 2d 342 ; Ledford v. Transportation Co., 237 N.C. 317 , 74 S.E. 2d 653 ; Hinson v. Britt, supra. Barnette v. Woody, ante, 424.

11955–1955
Lineberger v. . Phillips neutral
nc · 1930
11931–1931
State v. . Setzer neutral
nc · 1930
11931–1931
State v. . Mills neutral
nc · 1922
11928–1928
State v. . Morrison green
nc · 1881
11889–1889

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1 (5) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 8C-1 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

TX 261 (1891–2026) CA 206 (1867–2026) GA 203 (1900–2026) LA 124 (1925–2024) NY 105 (1862–2022) IL 90 (1893–2026) AL 87 (1880–2025) FL 63 (1893–2023) PA 56 (1842–2024) IA 56 (1879–2026) MA 50 (1894–2026) MO 49 (1891–2024) OR 35 (1914–2026) UT 31 (1989–2026) IN 30 (1876–2026) OH 30 (1928–2025) NM 29 (1927–2024) CT 28 (1963–2021) TN 27 (1899–2025) MD 26 (1883–2025) MI 26 (1880–2025) CO 26 (1918–2025) NC 25 (1889–2024) NJ 24 (1935–2021) WA 24 (1905–2025) AZ 24 (1935–2023) VA 21 (1901–2024) DC 21 (1947–2022) KS 20 (1897–2026) AR 16 (1989–2025) MS 14 (1985–2017) SC 14 (1916–2025) ME 14 (1959–2019) WI 14 (1900–2017) AK 13 (1978–2018) KY 12 (1960–2020) OK 12 (1916–2021) WV 11 (1956–2022) ID 9 (1885–2019) WY 8 (1931–2015) NV 8 (1963–2020) VT 8 (1905–2000) SD 8 (1909–2025) MT 8 (1978–2022) NH 7 (1970–2020) MN 6 (1906–2009) NE 5 (1948–2024) RI 4 (2000–2016) HI 4 (1928–2014) DE 2 (1966–1966)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check