qualifying instruction (North Carolina) · Go Syfert
← North Carolina issues

qualifying instruction in North Carolina

7 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1892–2020 0 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 (2)

CaseFollowedCited
Turner v. Duke Universitygreen
· 1989 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
2 sentences

2020A ruling to the contrary would be inconsistent with the purpose underlying Rule 13(g)’s prerequisite for the assertion of crossclaims in the first place. federal courts with respect to the Rules of Civil Procedure, “[d]ecisions under the federal rules are . . . pertinent for guidance and enlightenment in developing the philosophy of the North Carolina rules.” Turner v. Duke Univ., 325 N.C. 152, 164 , 381 S.E.2d 706, 713 (1989). -20- ORLANDO RESIDENCE, LTD.

2020A ruling to the contrary would be inconsistent with the purpose underlying Rule 13(g)’s prerequisite for the assertion of crossclaims in the first place. federal courts with respect to the Rules of Civil Procedure, “[d]ecisions under the federal rules are . . . pertinent for guidance and enlightenment in developing the philosophy of the North Carolina rules.” Turner v. Duke Univ., 325 N.C. 152, 164 , 381 S.E.2d 706, 713 (1989). -20- ORLANDO RESIDENCE, LTD.

22
Friedman v. Hartmanngreen
nysd · 1992 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
2 sentences

2020Opinion of the Court follows that if the qualifying claim asserted by a defendant is dismissed, all claims joined under Rule 18 must also be dismissed.” Id. § 18.02[2][c]; see, e.g., Friedman v. Hartmann, 787 F. Supp. 411, 423 (S.D.N.Y. 1992) (dismissing additional claims brought under Rule 18(a) on the basis that the underlying qualifying claim failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and therefore could not serve as the basis for the joinder of the unrelated claims).

2020Opinion of the Court follows that if the qualifying claim asserted by a defendant is dismissed, all claims joined under Rule 18 must also be dismissed.” Id. § 18.02[2][c]; see, e.g., Friedman v. Hartmann, 787 F. Supp. 411, 423 (S.D.N.Y. 1992) (dismissing additional claims brought under Rule 18(a) on the basis that the underlying qualifying claim failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and therefore could not serve as the basis for the joinder of the unrelated claims).

22

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 (8)

CaseCitedYears
State v. . Holland neutral
nc · 1939
2 sentences

1982State v. Kimmer, 249 N.C. 290 , 106 S.E. 2d 215 (1958); State v. Davis, 223 N.C. 57 , 25 S.E. 2d 187 (1943); State v. Holland, 216 N.C. 610 , 6 S.E. 2d 217 (1939).

1982State v. Kimmer, 249 N.C. 290 , 106 S.E. 2d 215 (1958); State v. Davis, 223 N.C. 57 , 25 S.E. 2d 187 (1943); State v. Holland, 216 N.C. 610 , 6 S.E. 2d 217 (1939).

21943–1982
State v. . Davis neutral
nc · 1943
2 sentences

1982State v. Kimmer, 249 N.C. 290 , 106 S.E. 2d 215 (1958); State v. Davis, 223 N.C. 57 , 25 S.E. 2d 187 (1943); State v. Holland, 216 N.C. 610 , 6 S.E. 2d 217 (1939).

1982State v. Kimmer, 249 N.C. 290 , 106 S.E. 2d 215 (1958); State v. Davis, 223 N.C. 57 , 25 S.E. 2d 187 (1943); State v. Holland, 216 N.C. 610 , 6 S.E. 2d 217 (1939).

11982–1982
State v. Kimmer neutral
nc · 1958
2 sentences

1982State v. Kimmer, 249 N.C. 290 , 106 S.E. 2d 215 (1958); State v. Davis, 223 N.C. 57 , 25 S.E. 2d 187 (1943); State v. Holland, 216 N.C. 610 , 6 S.E. 2d 217 (1939).

1982State v. Kimmer, 249 N.C. 290 , 106 S.E. 2d 215 (1958); State v. Davis, 223 N.C. 57 , 25 S.E. 2d 187 (1943); State v. Holland, 216 N.C. 610 , 6 S.E. 2d 217 (1939).

11982–1982
State v. . Murphy green
nc · 1911
2 sentences

1949It is fully stated and discussed in S. v. Murphy, 157 N. C. 614 , 72 S. E. 1075 .

1949It is fully stated and discussed in S. v. Murphy, 157 N. C. 614 , 72 S. E. 1075 .

11949–1949
State v. . Ellington neutral
· 1846
1 sentence

1943This is in accord with a long line of our decisions, beginning with S. v. Ellinglon, 29 N. C., 61 , and continuing through S. v. Holland, 216 N. C., 610 , 6 S. E. (2d), 217 .

11943–1943
Milliken v. Pratt green
mass · 1878
1 sentence

1893Even in Milliken v. Pratt, supra, in which the lex loci contractus is pushed to the extreme limit, it is *63 suggested that where the incapacity of a married woman is the settled policy of the State “for the protection of its own citizens, it could not be held by the Courts of that State to yield to the law of another State in which she might undertake to contract.” In Robertson v. Queen, 87 Tenn., 445 , the contract was made by the feme defendant in Kentucky, where she resided and under whose laws she was capable of contracting.

11893–1893
Robinson v. Queen neutral
tenn · 1889
1 sentence

1893Even in Milliken v. Pratt, supra, in which the lex loci contractus is pushed to the extreme limit, it is *63 suggested that where the incapacity of a married woman is the settled policy of the State “for the protection of its own citizens, it could not be held by the Courts of that State to yield to the law of another State in which she might undertake to contract.” In Robertson v. Queen, 87 Tenn., 445 , the contract was made by the feme defendant in Kentucky, where she resided and under whose laws she was capable of contracting.

11893–1893
Southerland v. . Fremont neutral
nc · 1890
1 sentence

1892It is true, as laid down in Southerland v. Fremont, 107 N. C., 565 , that such a trustee or mortgagee is a purchaser for value within the statutes of 13th and 27th Elizabeth, but it is, in that case, conclusively determined, after some confusion in our decisions, that such a purchaser takes the property subject to any equity or other right that attached to the same in the hands of the debtor.

11892–1892

Where else courts name it

CA 104 (1915–2026) MD 22 (1919–2021) NY 16 (1882–2005) PA 15 (1907–2024) LA 14 (1916–2025) FL 12 (1939–2025) TX 12 (1926–2024) WA 9 (1872–2005) NV 9 (1990–1998) AL 9 (1890–2003) OR 8 (1901–2019) MO 8 (1929–2022) KY 8 (1916–2014) NC 7 (1892–2020) WI 6 (1900–1988) AZ 5 (1905–2020) NJ 5 (1951–2007) IN 4 (1934–1965) NM 3 (2015–2015) SD 3 (1931–1949) OK 3 (1924–1983) MS 3 (1967–2011) NE 3 (1936–2024) IA 3 (1908–1979) OH 3 (1935–2015) KS 2 (1912–1955) SC 2 (1928–1928) WV 2 (2020–2020) DC 2 (1942–1991) HI 2 (1951–1996) MA 2 (1947–2023) VA 2 (1937–1974) WY 2 (1980–2014) MT 2 (1980–2009)

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