hearing violation in North Carolina

17 North Carolina opinions name it 3 courts 1966–2023 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 (4)

Case	Followed	Cited
In Re ENSgreen ncctapp · 2004 · cited in 4 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2005–2005 2 sentences 2005In re E.N.S., 164 N.C.App. 146 , 153, 595 S.E.2d 167 , 172 (2004) (adjudication and dispositional orders entered over forty days after the hearing in violation of N.C. 2005In re E.N.S., 164 N.C.App. 146, 153 , 595 S.E.2d 167, 172 (2004) (adjudication and dispositional orders entered over forty days after the hearing in violation of N.C.	1	4
In Re BMgreen ncctapp · 2005 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2005–2005 2 sentences 2005Gen.Stat. § 7B-807(b) and § 7B-905(a) not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 189 , 606 S.E.2d 903 (2004); In re J.L.K., 165 N.C.App. 311 , ___, 598 S.E.2d 387 , 390 (2004) (termination order entered eighty-nine days after the hearing not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 68 , 604 S.E.2d 314 (2004); In re B.M., ___ N.C.App. ___, ___, 607 S.E.2d 698 , 701-02 (2005) (delay in filing petition seeking termination of parental rights in violation of N.C. 2005Gen.Stat. § 7B-807(b) and § 7B-905(a) not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 189 , 606 S.E.2d 903 (2004); In re J.L.K., 165 N.C.App. 311, 314-15 , 598 S.E.2d 387, 390 (2004) (termination order entered eighty-nine days after the hearing not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 68 , 604 S.E.2d 314 (2004); In re B.M., 168 N.C.App. 350, 353-55 , 607 S.E.2d 698, 701-02 (2005) (delay in filing petition seeking termination of parental rights in violation of N.C.	1	2
In Re JLKgreen ncctapp · 2004 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2005–2005 2 sentences 2005Gen.Stat. § 7B-807(b) and § 7B-905(a) not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 189 , 606 S.E.2d 903 (2004); In re J.L.K., 165 N.C.App. 311 , ___, 598 S.E.2d 387 , 390 (2004) (termination order entered eighty-nine days after the hearing not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 68 , 604 S.E.2d 314 (2004); In re B.M., ___ N.C.App. ___, ___, 607 S.E.2d 698 , 701-02 (2005) (delay in filing petition seeking termination of parental rights in violation of N.C. 2005Gen.Stat. § 7B-807(b) and § 7B-905(a) not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 189 , 606 S.E.2d 903 (2004); In re J.L.K., 165 N.C.App. 311, 314-15 , 598 S.E.2d 387, 390 (2004) (termination order entered eighty-nine days after the hearing not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 68 , 604 S.E.2d 314 (2004); In re B.M., 168 N.C.App. 350, 353-55 , 607 S.E.2d 698, 701-02 (2005) (delay in filing petition seeking termination of parental rights in violation of N.C.	1	2
State v. Byrdgreen ncctapp · 2007 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009 2 sentences 2009The dissenting opinion then concludes, "To increase Defendant's prison term on the basis of a TRO, without affording him the opportunity to be heard as to the allegations of domestic violence against him, would violate his right to due process." Byrd, 185 N.C.App. at 610 , 649 S.E.2d at 452 (Wynn, J., dissenting). 2009The dissenting opinion then concludes, "To increase Defendant's prison term on the basis of a TRO, without affording him the opportunity to be heard as to the allegations of domestic violence against him, would violate his right to due process." Byrd, 185 N.C.App. at 610 , 649 S.E.2d at 452 (Wynn, J., dissenting).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (15)

Case	Cited	Years
In the Matter of Ens green nc · 2004 2 sentences 2005Gen.Stat. § 7B-807(b) and § 7B-905(a) not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 189 , 606 S.E.2d 903 (2004); In re J.L.K., 165 N.C.App. 311, 314-15 , 598 S.E.2d 387, 390 (2004) (termination order entered eighty-nine days after the hearing not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 68 , 604 S.E.2d 314 (2004); In re B.M., 168 N.C.App. 350, 353-55 , 607 S.E.2d 698, 701-02 (2005) (delay in filing petition seeking termination of parental rights in violation of N.C. 2005Gen.Stat. § 7B-807(b) and § 7B-905(a) not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 189 , 606 S.E.2d 903 (2004); In re J.L.K., 165 N.C.App. 311, 314-15 , 598 S.E.2d 387, 390 (2004) (termination order entered eighty-nine days after the hearing not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 68 , 604 S.E.2d 314 (2004); In re B.M., 168 N.C.App. 350, 353-55 , 607 S.E.2d 698, 701-02 (2005) (delay in filing petition seeking termination of parental rights in violation of N.C.	4	2005–2005
In re E.N.S. green ncctapp · 2004 2 sentences 2005In re E.N.S., 164 N.C.App. 146 , 153, 595 S.E.2d 167 , 172 (2004) (adjudication and dispositional orders entered over forty days after the hearing in violation of N.C. 2005In re E.N.S., 164 N.C.App. 146, 153 , 595 S.E.2d 167, 172 (2004) (adjudication and dispositional orders entered over forty days after the hearing in violation of N.C.	4	2005–2005
State v. Berryman green nc · 2006 2 sentences 2022Thus, Plaintiff, “as the appellant, bore the burden . . . of ensuring that the record on appeal . . . [was] complete, properly settled, in correct form, and filed[.]” Id. at 217 , 624 S.E.2d at 356 . ¶ 50 Plaintiff has chosen not to include a transcript of the hearing on Defendants’ motion to dismiss in the record on appeal on the grounds that no evidence was presented at the hearing and the hearing consisted only of arguments of counsel and colloquy with the court. 2022Thus, Plaintiff, “as the appellant, bore the burden . . . of ensuring that the record on appeal . . . [was] complete, properly settled, in correct form, and filed[.]” Id. at 217 , 624 S.E.2d at 356 . ¶ 50 Plaintiff has chosen not to include a transcript of the hearing on Defendants’ motion to dismiss in the record on appeal on the grounds that no evidence was presented at the hearing and the hearing consisted only of arguments of counsel and colloquy with the court.	3	2022–2022
State v. Stukes green ncctapp · 2002 2 sentences 2016Id. 2016Id.	2	2016–2016
In re J.L.K. green ncctapp · 2004 2 sentences 2005Gen.Stat. § 7B-807(b) and § 7B-905(a) not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 189 , 606 S.E.2d 903 (2004); In re J.L.K., 165 N.C.App. 311 , ___, 598 S.E.2d 387 , 390 (2004) (termination order entered eighty-nine days after the hearing not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 68 , 604 S.E.2d 314 (2004); In re B.M., ___ N.C.App. ___, ___, 607 S.E.2d 698 , 701-02 (2005) (delay in filing petition seeking termination of parental rights in violation of N.C. 2005Gen.Stat. § 7B-807(b) and § 7B-905(a) not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 189 , 606 S.E.2d 903 (2004); In re J.L.K., 165 N.C.App. 311, 314-15 , 598 S.E.2d 387, 390 (2004) (termination order entered eighty-nine days after the hearing not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 68 , 604 S.E.2d 314 (2004); In re B.M., 168 N.C.App. 350, 353-55 , 607 S.E.2d 698, 701-02 (2005) (delay in filing petition seeking termination of parental rights in violation of N.C.	2	2005–2005
In Re JLK green nc · 2004 2 sentences 2005Gen.Stat. § 7B-807(b) and § 7B-905(a) not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 189 , 606 S.E.2d 903 (2004); In re J.L.K., 165 N.C.App. 311, 314-15 , 598 S.E.2d 387, 390 (2004) (termination order entered eighty-nine days after the hearing not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 68 , 604 S.E.2d 314 (2004); In re B.M., 168 N.C.App. 350, 353-55 , 607 S.E.2d 698, 701-02 (2005) (delay in filing petition seeking termination of parental rights in violation of N.C. 2005Gen.Stat. § 7B-807(b) and § 7B-905(a) not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 189 , 606 S.E.2d 903 (2004); In re J.L.K., 165 N.C.App. 311, 314-15 , 598 S.E.2d 387, 390 (2004) (termination order entered eighty-nine days after the hearing not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 68 , 604 S.E.2d 314 (2004); In re B.M., 168 N.C.App. 350, 353-55 , 607 S.E.2d 698, 701-02 (2005) (delay in filing petition seeking termination of parental rights in violation of N.C.	2	2005–2005
Pate v. Robinson green scotus · 1966 1 sentence 2023Id. at 386 ; Drope, 420 U.S. at 172, 180 .	1	2023–2023
State v. Hanner green ncctapp · 2008 1 sentence 2009Crumbley at 67 , 519 S.E.2d at 99 ; Hanner at 142 , 654 S.E.2d at 823 .	1	2009–2009
State v. Crumbley green ncctapp · 1999 1 sentence 2009Crumbley at 67 , 519 S.E.2d at 99 ; Hanner at 142 , 654 S.E.2d at 823 .	1	2009–2009
In re B.M. green ncctapp · 2005 1 sentence 2005Gen.Stat. § 7B-807(b) and § 7B-905(a) not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 189 , 606 S.E.2d 903 (2004); In re J.L.K., 165 N.C.App. 311, 314-15 , 598 S.E.2d 387, 390 (2004) (termination order entered eighty-nine days after the hearing not reversible error without a showing of prejudice), disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 68 , 604 S.E.2d 314 (2004); In re B.M., 168 N.C.App. 350, 353-55 , 607 S.E.2d 698, 701-02 (2005) (delay in filing petition seeking termination of parental rights in violation of N.C.	1	2005–2005
State v. Drake green ncctapp · 1976 1 sentence 2001App. 187 , 229 S.E.2d 51 (1976). *578 Accordingly, we conclude that it was in the trial court’s discretion whether to conduct a hearing and inquiry of juror Boulton.	1	2001–2001
Pratt v. Central Upholstery Co. green nc · 1960 2 sentences 1997Pratt v. Central Upholstery Co. , 252 N.C. 716 , 720-721 , 115 S.E.2d 27 (1960) 3. 1997Pratt v. Central Upholstery Co. , 252 N.C. 716 , 720-721 , 115 S.E.2d 27 (1960) 3.	1	1997–1997
State v. Williams green ncctapp · 1978 1 sentence 1983App. 183 , 247 S.E. 2d 620 (1978), reached a similar conclusion as to the hearing requirement of G.S. 15A-1002(b)(3): The defendant produced no evidence in support of her motion other than counsel’s statements that the defendant had indicated to him that she was not able to assist in the defense of her case.	1	1983–1983
State ex rel. Commissioner of Insurance v. North Carolina Fire Insurance Rating Bureau green ncctapp · 1976 1 sentence 1976The apparent conflict between the hearing requirement of G.S. 58-27.2 (a) and the “deemer provision” of G.S. 58-131.1 was resolved recently in Comr. of Insurance v. Rating Bureau, 29 N.C.	1	1976–1976
State v. . Johnson neutral nc · 1891 2 sentences 1966“The implication is plain that the clerk is to hold the hearing on the challenge only after notice to the parties." Collins v. Highway Commission, supra. “A party in court is fixed with notice of all orders and decrees taken at term, for it is his duty to be there in person or by attorney; but he is not held to have notice of orders out of term; nor of orders before the clerk.” [Emphasis added.] State v. Johnson, 109 N.C. 852 , 13 S.E. 843 . 1966“The implication is plain that the clerk is to hold the hearing on the challenge only after notice to the parties." Collins v. Highway Commission, supra. “A party in court is fixed with notice of all orders and decrees taken at term, for it is his duty to be there in person or by attorney; but he is not held to have notice of orders out of term; nor of orders before the clerk.” [Emphasis added.] State v. Johnson, 109 N.C. 852 , 13 S.E. 843 .	1	1966–1966

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1 (8) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1109 (4) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-807 (4) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-905 (4) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 36C-10-1001 (3) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 36C-2-203 (3) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 36C-6-604 (3) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 36C-8-801 (3) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 36C-8-802 (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

LA 310 (1918–2025) NY 254 (1890–2026) OH 130 (1960–2026) TX 129 (1932–2026) PA 125 (1870–2026) CA 101 (1954–2026) IL 89 (1942–2026) FL 79 (1955–2025) GA 42 (1910–2024) MI 40 (1929–2025) MO 39 (1927–2025) IN 38 (1965–2025) AL 33 (1912–2018) WI 33 (1890–2025) CO 31 (1891–2026) MA 26 (1984–2026) MD 24 (1951–2024) CT 24 (1977–2025) NJ 23 (1958–2024) AZ 22 (1973–2025) WA 20 (1981–2025) OR 20 (1977–2026) DC 18 (1970–2023) NC 17 (1966–2023) MS 17 (1990–2021) NM 17 (1967–2022) IA 16 (1931–2023) MN 14 (1986–2024) KS 14 (1940–2024) MT 13 (1977–2026) UT 13 (1924–2026) TN 12 (1943–2026) OK 11 (1928–2016) RI 11 (1972–2025) AR 11 (1956–2021) WV 10 (1895–2026) NV 9 (1999–2020) ND 9 (1952–2025) VA 9 (1980–2025) KY 9 (1933–2020) ID 9 (1973–2022) HI 9 (1995–2025) DE 8 (1954–2025) SC 7 (1931–2026) AK 6 (1984–2020) NE 6 (1906–2021) WY 5 (1955–2007) NH 4 (1974–1989) ME 4 (2007–2012) VT 4 (1979–2014) VI 3 (2012–2016) SD 2 (1990–1990)

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