consistent rule in North Carolina

2018See Tice v. Winchester , 225 N.C. 673 , 678, 36 S.E.2d 257 , 260 (1945) ("[M]ore permanent monuments referred to in the deed would, under the authorities mentioned, control over course and distance." (citation omitted) ).

2018See Tice v. Winchester , 225 N.C. 673 , 678, 36 S.E.2d 257 , 260 (1945) ("[M]ore permanent monuments referred to in the deed would, under the authorities mentioned, control over course and distance." (citation omitted) ).

2012In State v. Williams, 303 N.C. 507, 513 , 279 S.E.2d 592, 596 (1981), where the defendant was charged with two counts of first-degree sex *501 offense, evidence that a third young girl more than three years older than the victims was properly admitted to show intent and plan or design.

2012In State v. Williams, 303 N.C. 507, 513 , 279 S.E.2d 592, 596 (1981), where the defendant was charged with two counts of first-degree sex *501 offense, evidence that a third young girl more than three years older than the victims was properly admitted to show intent and plan or design.

2002Among the reasons for this long-standing and consistent rule is "[t]he marital presumption reflects the force of public policy which seeks to prevent `parent[s] from bastardizing [their] own issue.'" Id. (quoting State v. Rogers, 260 N.C. 406, 408 , 133 S.E.2d 1, 2 (1963)).

2002Among the reasons for this long-standing and consistent rule is "[t]he marital presumption reflects the force of public policy which seeks to prevent `parent[s] from bastardizing [their] own issue.'" Id. (quoting State v. Rogers, 260 N.C. 406, 408 , 133 S.E.2d 1, 2 (1963)).

1996App. 105, 116 , 465 S.E.2d 2, 9 (1995) (Judge Martin, Mark D., concurring) (emphasizing “need for the appellate division to articulate a consistent standard of review when considering the Commission’s factual findings”), we believe the standard continues to be that adopted by our Supreme Court and repeatedly followed in appellate decisions thereafter.

1995Compare Andrews v. Fulcher Tire Sales and Service, 120 N.C.App. 602, 605 , 463 S.E.2d 425, 427 (1995) (this Court bound by Commission's findings if supported by "sufficient competent evidence") with Strickland v. Carolina Classics Catfish, Inc., 119 N.C.App. 97, 102 , 458 S.E.2d 10, 13 (1995) (this Court's review limited to determination of whether Commission's findings are supported by "any competent evidence").

1995Compare Andrews v. Fulcher Tire Sales and Service, 120 N.C.App. 602, 605 , 463 S.E.2d 425, 427 (1995) (this Court bound by Commission's findings if supported by "sufficient competent evidence") with Strickland v. Carolina Classics Catfish, Inc., 119 N.C.App. 97, 102 , 458 S.E.2d 10, 13 (1995) (this Court's review limited to determination of whether Commission's findings are supported by "any competent evidence").

1995Compare Andrews v. Fulcher Tire Sales and Service, 120 N.C.App. 602, 605 , 463 S.E.2d 425, 427 (1995) (this Court bound by Commission's findings if supported by "sufficient competent evidence") with Strickland v. Carolina Classics Catfish, Inc., 119 N.C.App. 97, 102 , 458 S.E.2d 10, 13 (1995) (this Court's review limited to determination of whether Commission's findings are supported by "any competent evidence").

1995Compare Andrews v. Fulcher Tire Sales and Service, 120 N.C.App. 602, 605 , 463 S.E.2d 425, 427 (1995) (this Court bound by Commission's findings if supported by "sufficient competent evidence") with Strickland v. Carolina Classics Catfish, Inc., 119 N.C.App. 97, 102 , 458 S.E.2d 10, 13 (1995) (this Court's review limited to determination of whether Commission's findings are supported by "any competent evidence").