(a) The Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals have jurisdiction, exercisable by any one of the justices or judges of the respective courts, to issue the writ of habeas corpus upon the application of any person described in G.S. 17-3, according to the practice and procedure provided therefor in chapter 17 of the General Statutes, and to rule of the Supreme Court.
(b) The Supreme Court has jurisdiction, exercisable by one justice or by such number of justices as the court may by rule provide, to issue the prerogative writs, including mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and supersedeas, in aid of its own jurisdiction or in exercise of its general power to supervise and control the proceedings of any of the other courts of the General Court of Justice. The practice and procedure shall be as provided by statute or rule of the Supreme Court, or, in the absence of statute or rule, according to the practice and procedure of the common law.
(c) The Court of Appeals has jurisdiction, exercisable by one judge or by such number of judges as the Supreme Court may by rule provide, to issue the prerogative writs, including mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and supersedeas, in aid of its own jurisdiction, or to supervise and control the proceedings of any of the trial courts of the General Court of Justice, and of the Utilities Commission and the Industrial Commission. The practice and procedure shall be as provided by statute or rule of the Supreme Court, or, in the absence of statute or rule, according to the practice and procedure of the common law. (1967, c. 108, s. 1.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
277
cases (
109 in the last 5 years), 1970–2026 · leading case:
State v. Thomsen, 789 S.E.2d 639 (N.C. 2016).
State v. Thomsen, 789 S.E.2d 639 (N.C. 2016).
· cites it 16× “The General Assembly has exercised this constitutional authority in N.C.G.S. § 7A-32(c) by giving the Court of Appeals “jurisdiction .”
State v. Ledbetter, 814 S.E.2d 39 (N.C. 2018).
· cites it 12× “to issue the prerogative writs, including mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and supersedeas, in aid of its own jurisdiction, or to supervise and control the proceedings of any of the trial courts of the General Court of Justice.”
State v. Biddix, 780 S.E.2d 863 (N.C. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 16× “N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-32(c) (2013) (emphasis supplied).”
In re T.H.T., 665 S.E.2d 54 (N.C. 2008).
· cites it 6× “N.C.G.S. § 7A-32(b), (c) (2007). Appellate courts may only issue mandamus to enforce established rights, not to create new rights.”
State v. Ledbetter, 794 S.E.2d 551 (N.C. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 10× “2d at 641 (quoting N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-32(c) (2015) ). The Court explained N.”
State v. Thomsen, 776 S.E.2d 41 (N.C. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 17× “The State argued in its petition that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction based upon the North Carolina Constitution and N.C. Gen.Stat. § 7A-32(c), which provides that this Court may issue writs of certiorari "as provided by statute or rule of the Supreme Court," or…”
State v. Jones, 802 S.E.2d 518 (N.C. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 7× “§ 7A-32(c) (2015), our General Assembly expressly granted the Court of Appeals jurisdiction to issue a writ of certiorari: (c) The Court of Appeals has jurisdiction, exercisable by one judge or by such number of judges as the Supreme Court may by rule provide, to issue the…”
Carey v. Saffold, 536 U.S. 214 (2002).
· cites it 2× “VI, § 3; N. C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-32(a) (1999); N. D.”
Fisher v. Flue-Cured Tobacco Coop. Stabilization Corp., 794 S.E.2d 699 (N.C. 2016).
· cites it 6× “The case sub judice involves “a class of producers of flue-cured tobacco who were members/shareholders of Defendant at times material and signed marketing agreements with Defendant pursuant to which the putative class members delivered tobacco to Defendant that was either sold…”
State v. Stubbs, 754 S.E.2d 174 (N.C. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 12× “The State argues that Rule 21 is not intended to limit the subject matter jurisdiction of this Court but is simply a “rule” establishing a “practice and procedure,” and that Rule 2 - which allows this Court to “suspend or vary the requirements of any of these rules” - provides…”
Bailey v. Gooding, 270 S.E.2d 431 (N.C. 1980).
· cites it 4× “IV, § 12(1); G.S. § 7A-32(b) (1969). We decline to do so for the reasons stated above and because we strongly feel that fragmented appeals such as that here presented seriously encroach upon judicial time and effort and threaten the orderly administration of justice.”
State v. Stubbs, 770 S.E.2d 74 (N.C. 2015).
· cites it 4× “” N.C.G.S. § 7A-32(c) (2014). More specifically, and also relevant here, the General Assembly has specified when appeals relating to MARs may be taken: *43 (c) The court’s ruling on a motion for appropriate relief pursuant to G.”
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-32(a) — 1 case
Carey v. Saffold, 536 U.S. 214 (2002).
“VI, § 3; N. C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-32(a) (1999); N. D.”
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-32(b) — 106 cases
In re T.H.T., 665 S.E.2d 54 (N.C. 2008).
“N.C.G.S. § 7A-32(b), (c) (2007). Appellate courts may only issue mandamus to enforce established rights, not to create new rights.”
Fisher v. Flue-Cured Tobacco Coop. Stabilization Corp., 794 S.E.2d 699 (N.C. 2016).
“The case sub judice involves “a class of producers of flue-cured tobacco who were members/shareholders of Defendant at times material and signed marketing agreements with Defendant pursuant to which the putative class members delivered tobacco to Defendant that was either sold…”
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-32(c) — 145 cases
State v. Thomsen, 789 S.E.2d 639 (N.C. 2016).
“The General Assembly has exercised this constitutional authority in N.C.G.S. § 7A-32(c) by giving the Court of Appeals “jurisdiction .”
State v. Ledbetter, 814 S.E.2d 39 (N.C. 2018).
“to issue the prerogative writs, including mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and supersedeas, in aid of its own jurisdiction, or to supervise and control the proceedings of any of the trial courts of the General Court of Justice.”
State v. Biddix, 780 S.E.2d 863 (N.C. Ct. App. 2015).
“N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-32(c) (2013) (emphasis supplied).”
State v. Ledbetter, 794 S.E.2d 551 (N.C. Ct. App. 2016).
“2d at 641 (quoting N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-32(c) (2015) ). The Court explained N.”
State v. Thomsen, 776 S.E.2d 41 (N.C. Ct. App. 2015).
“The State argued in its petition that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction based upon the North Carolina Constitution and N.C. Gen.Stat. § 7A-32(c), which provides that this Court may issue writs of certiorari "as provided by statute or rule of the Supreme Court," or…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.