fatal weakness claim in North Carolina

2003“The rule is designed to permit penetration of an unfounded claim or defense in advance of trial and to allow summary disposition for either party when a fatal weakness in the claim or defense is exposed.” Caldwell v. Deese, 288 N.C. 375, 378 , 218 S.E.2d 379, 381 (1975).

2003“The rule is designed to permit penetration of an unfounded claim or defense in advance of trial and to allow summary disposition for either party when a fatal weakness in the claim or defense is exposed.” Caldwell v. Deese, 288 N.C. 375, 378 , 218 S.E.2d 379, 381 (1975).

2009"The purpose of summary judgment is to eliminate formal trials where only questions of law are involved by permitting penetration of an unfounded claim or defense in advance of trial and allowing summary disposition for either party when a fatal weakness in the claim or defense is exposed." Moore v. Fieldcrest Mills, Inc., 296 N.C. 467, 470 , 251 S.E.2d 419, 422 (1979) (citation omitted).

2009"The purpose of summary judgment is to eliminate formal trials where only questions of law are involved by permitting penetration of an unfounded claim or defense in advance of trial and allowing summary disposition for either party when a fatal weakness in the claim or defense is exposed." Moore v. Fieldcrest Mills, Inc., 296 N.C. 467, 470 , 251 S.E.2d 419, 422 (1979) (citation omitted).

1987Summary judgment is designed to “eliminate the necessity of a formal trial where only questions of law are involved and a fatal weakness in the claim ... of a party is exposed.” Foster v. Winston-Salem Joint Venture, 303 N.C. 636, 642 , 281 S.E. 2d 36, 40 (1981).

1987Summary judgment is designed to “eliminate the necessity of a formal trial where only questions of law are involved and a fatal weakness in the claim ... of a party is exposed.” Foster v. Winston-Salem Joint Venture, 303 N.C. 636, 642 , 281 S.E. 2d 36, 40 (1981).

2026This mechanism “eliminate[s] the necessity of a formal trial where only questions of law are involved and a fatal weakness in the claim of a party is exposed”—even when “view[ed] . . . in a light most favorable to the nonmov[ant],” Dalton, 353 N.C. at 650–51.

2022CITY OF HIGH POINT 2022-NCSC-63 Opinion of the Court most favorable to him, we conclude that there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Officer Blackman acted with malice in carrying out his official duties. ¶ 34 The purpose of summary judgment is to dispose of claims in which there are no disputed issues as to any material facts such that “only questions of law are involved and a fatal weakness in the claim of a party is exposed.” Dalton v. Camp, 353 N.C. 647, 650 (2001).

2005However, the purpose of summary judgment is “to ‘eliminate the necessity of a formal trial where only questions of law are involved and a fatal weakness in the claim ... of a party is exposed.’ ” Hall v. Post, 85 N.C.

2002Summary judgment should be used to “eliminate the necessity of a formal trial where only questions of law are involved and a fatal weakness in the claim ... is exposed.” Hall v. Post, 85 N.C.

1983“Summary judgment is designed to eliminate formal trials where only questions of law are involved by permitting penetration of an unfounded claim or defense in advance of trial and allowing summary disposition for either party when a fatal weakness in the claim or defense is exposed.” Vassey v. Burch, 301 N.C. 68, 72 , 269 S.E. 2d 137, 140 (1980).

1983“Summary judgment is designed to eliminate formal trials where only questions of law are involved by permitting penetration of an unfounded claim or defense in advance of trial and allowing summary disposition for either party when a fatal weakness in the claim or defense is exposed.” Vassey v. Burch, 301 N.C. 68, 72 , 269 S.E. 2d 137, 140 (1980).

2025In re Will of Jones, 362 N.C. 569, 573 (2008). “[S]ummary judgment is strong medicine and should be used with caution, . . . reserving it for cases where only questions of law are involved and a fatal weakness in the claim of a party is exposed.” Estate of Graham v. Lambert, 385 N.C. 644 , 650–51 (2024) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).

2012“Our standard of review of an appeal from summary judgment is de novo; such judgment is appropriate only when the record shows that ‘there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that any party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.’ ” In re Will of Jones, 362 N.C. 569, 573 , 669 S.E.2d 572, 576 (2008) (quoting Forbis v. Neal, 361 N.C. 519, 523-24 , 649 S.E.2d 382, 385 (2007)).

2005According to North Carolina law, summary judgment “is ‘ “a somewhat drastic remedy, [that] must be used with due regard to its purposes and a cautious observance of its requirements in order that no person shall be deprived of a trial on a genuine disputed factual issue.” ’ ” DeWitt v. Eveready Battery Co., 355 N.C. 672, 682 , 565 S.E.2d 140, 146 (2002) (citations omitted). “ ‘The purpose of summary judgment is to eliminate formal trials where only questions of law are involved by permitting penetration of an unfounded claim or defense in advance of trial and allowing summary disposition for e

2003Textiles v. Price Waterhouse, LLP, 350 N.C. 214, 220 , 513 S.E.2d 320, 325 (1999)). "`The purpose of summary judgment is to eliminate formal trials where only questions of law are involved by permitting penetration of an unfounded claim or defense in advance of trial and allowing summary disposition for either party when a fatal weakness in the claim or defense is exposed.'" Talbert v. Choplin, 40 N.C.App. 360, 363 , 253 S.E.2d 37, 40 (1979) (quoting Moore v. Fieldcrest Mills, Inc., 296 N.C. 467, 470 , 251 S.E.2d 419, 422 (1979)).

1985The purpose of summary judgment is to eliminate formal trials where only questions of law are involved by permitting penetration of an unfounded claim or defense in advance of trial and allowing summary disposition for either party when a fatal weakness in the claim or defense is exposed. [Citations omitted.] Gregory v. Perdue, Inc., 47 N.C.

1985App. 655, 656-57 , 267 S.E. 2d 584, 586 (1980).

2026App. 6, 10 (2015) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted), and “thereby eliminate the necessity of a formal trial where only questions of law are involved and a fatal weakness in the claim or defense of a party is exposed[,]” Ellis v. White, 156 N.C.

2024In that vein, summary judgment is proper if an “affirmative defense” bars “an essential element of the opposing party’s claim.” Craig, 363 N.C. at 337 (cleaned up).

2016See Bluebird Corp. v. Aubin, 188 N.C.

2012“Our standard of review of an appeal from summary judgment is de novo; such judgment is appropriate only when the record shows that ‘there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that any party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.’ ” In re Will of Jones, 362 N.C. 569, 573 , 669 S.E.2d 572, 576 (2008) (quoting Forbis v. Neal, 361 N.C. 519, 523-24 , 649 S.E.2d 382, 385 (2007)).

2012“Our standard of review of an appeal from summary judgment is de novo; such judgment is appropriate only when the record shows that ‘there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that any party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.’ ” In re Will of Jones, 362 N.C. 569, 573 , 669 S.E.2d 572, 576 (2008) (quoting Forbis v. Neal, 361 N.C. 519, 523-24 , 649 S.E.2d 382, 385 (2007)).

2009While summary judgment is rarely appropriate in cases involving ordinary and contributory negligence, summary judgment may be properly granted "where the evidence establishes the plaintiff's own negligence so clearly that no other reasonable conclusion may be reached[.]" Nicholson v. American Safety Utility Corp., 346 N.C. 767, 774 , 488 S.E.2d 240, 244 (1997) (citation omitted).

2009While summary judgment is rarely appropriate in cases involving ordinary and contributory negligence, summary judgment may be properly granted "where the evidence establishes the plaintiff's own negligence so clearly that no other reasonable conclusion may be reached[.]" Nicholson v. American Safety Utility Corp., 346 N.C. 767, 774 , 488 S.E.2d 240, 244 (1997) (citation omitted).

2005According to North Carolina law, summary judgment “is ‘ “a somewhat drastic remedy, [that] must be used with due regard to its purposes and a cautious observance of its requirements in order that no person shall be deprived of a trial on a genuine disputed factual issue.” ’ ” DeWitt v. Eveready Battery Co., 355 N.C. 672, 682 , 565 S.E.2d 140, 146 (2002) (citations omitted). “ ‘The purpose of summary judgment is to eliminate formal trials where only questions of law are involved by permitting penetration of an unfounded claim or defense in advance of trial and allowing summary disposition for e

2005According to North Carolina law, summary judgment “is ‘ “a somewhat drastic remedy, [that] must be used with due regard to its purposes and a cautious observance of its requirements in order that no person shall be deprived of a trial on a genuine disputed factual issue.” ’ ” DeWitt v. Eveready Battery Co., 355 N.C. 672, 682 , 565 S.E.2d 140, 146 (2002) (citations omitted). “ ‘The purpose of summary judgment is to eliminate formal trials where only questions of law are involved by permitting penetration of an unfounded claim or defense in advance of trial and allowing summary disposition for e

2003Summary judgment is proper "if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that any party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 56(c) (2001). "`The party moving for summary judgment ultimately has the burden of establishing the lack of any triable issue of fact.'" Pacheco v. Rogers and Breece, Inc., ___ N.C.App. ___, ___, 579 S.E.2d 505, 507 (2003) (quoting Pembee Mfg.

2003Textiles v. Price Waterhouse, LLP, 350 N.C. 214, 220 , 513 S.E.2d 320, 325 (1999)). "`The purpose of summary judgment is to eliminate formal trials where only questions of law are involved by permitting penetration of an unfounded claim or defense in advance of trial and allowing summary disposition for either party when a fatal weakness in the claim or defense is exposed.'" Talbert v. Choplin, 40 N.C.App. 360, 363 , 253 S.E.2d 37, 40 (1979) (quoting Moore v. Fieldcrest Mills, Inc., 296 N.C. 467, 470 , 251 S.E.2d 419, 422 (1979)).

2003Textiles v. Price Waterhouse, LLP, 350 N.C. 214, 220 , 513 S.E.2d 320, 325 (1999)). "`The purpose of summary judgment is to eliminate formal trials where only questions of law are involved by permitting penetration of an unfounded claim or defense in advance of trial and allowing summary disposition for either party when a fatal weakness in the claim or defense is exposed.'" Talbert v. Choplin, 40 N.C.App. 360, 363 , 253 S.E.2d 37, 40 (1979) (quoting Moore v. Fieldcrest Mills, Inc., 296 N.C. 467, 470 , 251 S.E.2d 419, 422 (1979)).

2000The purpose of summary judgment is to dispense with formal trials in cases where only legal issues remain “by permitting penetration of an unfounded claim or defense in advance of trial and allowing summary disposition for either party when a fatal weakness in the claim or defense is exposed.” Elliott v. Duke University, Inc., 66 N.C.

2000App. 590, 592 , 311 S.E.2d 632, 634 (1984).

1995See, e.g., Thompson v. Insurance Co., 44 N.C.