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

commit error in North Carolina

18 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1956–2025 4 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 (6)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Paynegreen
nc · 1971 · cited in 15 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2001–2025
2 sentences

2025See e.g., State v. Payne, 280 N.C. 170, 171 , 185 S.E.2d 101, 102 (1971) (“Ordinarily one who causes . . . the court to commit error is not in a position to repudiate his action or assign it as ground for a new trial.”); Frugard v. Pritchard, 338 N.C. 508, 512 , 450 S.E.2d 744, 746 (1994) (“A party may not complain of action which he induced.” (citations omitted)). -4- MCPHERSON V.

2025See e.g., State v. Payne, 280 N.C. 170, 171 , 185 S.E.2d 101, 102 (1971) (“Ordinarily one who causes . . . the court to commit error is not in a position to repudiate his action or assign it as ground for a new trial.”); Frugard v. Pritchard, 338 N.C. 508, 512 , 450 S.E.2d 744, 746 (1994) (“A party may not complain of action which he induced.” (citations omitted)). -4- MCPHERSON V.

1315
Frugard v. Pritchardgreen
nc · 1994 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2024–2025
2 sentences

2025See e.g., State v. Payne, 280 N.C. 170, 171 , 185 S.E.2d 101, 102 (1971) (“Ordinarily one who causes . . . the court to commit error is not in a position to repudiate his action or assign it as ground for a new trial.”); Frugard v. Pritchard, 338 N.C. 508, 512 , 450 S.E.2d 744, 746 (1994) (“A party may not complain of action which he induced.” (citations omitted)). -4- MCPHERSON V.

2025See e.g., State v. Payne, 280 N.C. 170, 171 , 185 S.E.2d 101, 102 (1971) (“Ordinarily one who causes . . . the court to commit error is not in a position to repudiate his action or assign it as ground for a new trial.”); Frugard v. Pritchard, 338 N.C. 508, 512 , 450 S.E.2d 744, 746 (1994) (“A party may not complain of action which he induced.” (citations omitted)). -4- MCPHERSON V.

22
Overton v. Overtongreen
nc · 1963 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
2 sentences

2009Invited error is not ground for a new trial."); Overton v. Overton, 260 N.C. 139, 144-45 , 132 S.E.2d 349, 353 (1963) ("However, in this case respondents may not assert the objection that the court wrongfully placed the burden of proof of the issue upon them" since "[t]hey requested in their prayer for instructions that the burden of proof be so placed, and the court complied.").

2009Invited error is not ground for a new trial."); Overton v. Overton, 260 N.C. 139, 144-45 , 132 S.E.2d 349, 353 (1963) ("However, in this case respondents may not assert the objection that the court wrongfully placed the burden of proof of the issue upon them" since "[t]hey requested in their prayer for instructions that the burden of proof be so placed, and the court complied.").

22
Sumner v. . Sumnergreen
nc · 1947 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2023–2023
2 sentences

2023MILLER Opinion of the Court redactions to the video were for the benefit of Defendant; and (3) Defendant agreed to the admission of the redacted video and its publication to the jury.” “[U]nder the doctrine of invited error, a party cannot complain of a charge given at his request, or which is in substance the same as one asked by him[.]” Sumner v. Sumner, 227 N.C. 610, 613 , 44 S.E.2d 40, 41 (1947) (citations omitted); see also State v. Payne, 280 N.C. 170, 171 , 185 S.E.2d 101, 102 (1971) (“Ordinarily one who causes . . . the court to commit error is not in a position to repudiate his action

2023MILLER Opinion of the Court redactions to the video were for the benefit of Defendant; and (3) Defendant agreed to the admission of the redacted video and its publication to the jury.” “[U]nder the doctrine of invited error, a party cannot complain of a charge given at his request, or which is in substance the same as one asked by him[.]” Sumner v. Sumner, 227 N.C. 610, 613 , 44 S.E.2d 40, 41 (1947) (citations omitted); see also State v. Payne, 280 N.C. 170, 171 , 185 S.E.2d 101, 102 (1971) (“Ordinarily one who causes . . . the court to commit error is not in a position to repudiate his action

11
State v. Gaineygreen
· 2002 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2018–2018
2 sentences

2018See State v. Gainey , 355 N.C. 73 , 93, 558 S.E.2d 463 , 477 (2002) ("Constitutional questions not raised and passed upon at trial will not be considered on appeal." (citation omitted) ); State v. Sharpe , 344 N.C. 190 , 194, 473 S.E.2d 3 , 5 (1996) ("[W]here a theory argued on appeal was not raised before the trial court, the law does not permit parties to swap horses between courts ... [for] a better mount ...." (citation and internal quotation marks omitted) ); State v. Payne , 280 N.C. 170 , 171, 185 S.E.2d 101 , 102 (1971) (explaining that where a defendant "causes (or ... joins in causin

2018See State v. Gainey , 355 N.C. 73 , 93, 558 S.E.2d 463 , 477 (2002) ("Constitutional questions not raised and passed upon at trial will not be considered on appeal." (citation omitted) ); State v. Sharpe , 344 N.C. 190 , 194, 473 S.E.2d 3 , 5 (1996) ("[W]here a theory argued on appeal was not raised before the trial court, the law does not permit parties to swap horses between courts ... [for] a better mount ...." (citation and internal quotation marks omitted) ); State v. Payne , 280 N.C. 170 , 171, 185 S.E.2d 101 , 102 (1971) (explaining that where a defendant "causes (or ... joins in causin

11
State v. Gobalgreen
ncctapp · 2007 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
1 sentence

2014App. 308 , 319—20, 651 S.E.2d 279, 287 (2007) (“Statements elicited by a defendant on cross-examination are, even if error, invited error, by which a defendant cannot -12- be prejudiced as a matter of law.” (citations omitted)); State v. Payne, 280 N.C. 170, 171 , 185 S.E.2d 101, 102 (1971) (“[O]ne who causes . . . the court to commit error is not in a position to repudiate his action and assign it as ground for a new trial.

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 (6)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Sharpe green
nc · 1996
2 sentences

2018See State v. Gainey , 355 N.C. 73 , 93, 558 S.E.2d 463 , 477 (2002) ("Constitutional questions not raised and passed upon at trial will not be considered on appeal." (citation omitted) ); State v. Sharpe , 344 N.C. 190 , 194, 473 S.E.2d 3 , 5 (1996) ("[W]here a theory argued on appeal was not raised before the trial court, the law does not permit parties to swap horses between courts ... [for] a better mount ...." (citation and internal quotation marks omitted) ); State v. Payne , 280 N.C. 170 , 171, 185 S.E.2d 101 , 102 (1971) (explaining that where a defendant "causes (or ... joins in causin

2018See State v. Gainey , 355 N.C. 73 , 93, 558 S.E.2d 463 , 477 (2002) ("Constitutional questions not raised and passed upon at trial will not be considered on appeal." (citation omitted) ); State v. Sharpe , 344 N.C. 190 , 194, 473 S.E.2d 3 , 5 (1996) ("[W]here a theory argued on appeal was not raised before the trial court, the law does not permit parties to swap horses between courts ... [for] a better mount ...." (citation and internal quotation marks omitted) ); State v. Payne , 280 N.C. 170 , 171, 185 S.E.2d 101 , 102 (1971) (explaining that where a defendant "causes (or ... joins in causin

12018–2018
State v. Jones green
ncctapp · 2011
2 sentences

2015"It is well established that a defendant who causes or joins in causing the trial court to commit error is not in a position to repudiate his action and assign it as ground for a new trial." State v. Jones, 213 N.C.App. 59 , 67, 711 S.E.2d 791 , 796 (2011) (marks omitted).

2015"It is well established that a defendant who causes or joins in causing the trial court to commit error is not in a position to repudiate his action and assign it as ground for a new trial." State v. Jones, 213 N.C.App. 59 , 67, 711 S.E.2d 791 , 796 (2011) (marks omitted).

12015–2015
State v. Barber green
· 2001
2 sentences

2015In State v. Barber, 147 N.C.App. 69 , 74, 554 S.E.2d 413 , 416 (2001) (marks omitted), we further recognized that pursuant to North Carolina General Statutes § 15A-1443(c) "a defendant is not prejudiced ... by error resulting from his own conduct.

2015In State v. Barber, 147 N.C.App. 69 , 74, 554 S.E.2d 413 , 416 (2001) (marks omitted), we further recognized that pursuant to North Carolina General Statutes § 15A-1443(c) "a defendant is not prejudiced ... by error resulting from his own conduct.

12015–2015
Medford v. Davis green
ncctapp · 1983
1 sentence

2001See State v. Payne, 280 N.C. 170, 185 , S.E.2d 101 (1971); Medford v. Davis, 62 N.C.

12001–2001
Erickson v. Starling green
nc · 1952
2 sentences

1968Ervin, J., stated in Erickson v. Starling, 235 N.C. 643 , 71 S.E. 2d 384 : “A motion for judgment on the pleadings is in the nature of a demurrer. ...

1968Ervin, J., stated in Erickson v. Starling, 235 N.C. 643 , 71 S.E. 2d 384 : “A motion for judgment on the pleadings is in the nature of a demurrer. ...

11968–1968
State v. McIver green
nc · 1949
2 sentences

1956In S. v. McIver, 231 N.C. 313 , 56 S.E. 2d 604 , the facts were as follows: On 7 January about 7:00 a.m.

1956In S. v. McIver, 231 N.C. 313 , 56 S.E. 2d 604 , the facts were as follows: On 7 January about 7:00 a.m.

11956–1956

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1443 (9) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 8C-1 (4) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1001 (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

PA 62 (1995–2026) NC 18 (1956–2025) VA 13 (1877–2010) TX 11 (1937–2025) IL 8 (1941–2025) MD 7 (1974–2023) CA 6 (1923–2014) MO 6 (1887–2013) AL 6 (1902–2003) GA 5 (1922–2005) WV 5 (1945–2013) FL 5 (1965–1999) OH 5 (1929–2025) IN 5 (1974–2012) MI 4 (1968–2025) NY 4 (1897–1992) OK 4 (1910–1931) TN 4 (1920–2018) WA 4 (1925–1986) KS 3 (1938–2018) CO 2 (1917–1971) LA 2 (1981–2010) ID 2 (1935–1945) UT 2 (2015–2019) KY 2 (1917–1925)

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