Summary
The Supreme Court of North Carolina held that the plaintiff failed to comply with the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure governing assignments of error and appellate briefs. It vacated the Court of Appeals' decision and dismissed the plaintiff's appeal, rejecting the Court of Appeals' use of Rule 2 to suspend the appellate rules.
Holdings
- The appeal was subject to dismissal because the appellant failed to comply with mandatory appellate rules governing assignments of error and briefing. The assignments were not properly numbered or supported by specific record references, one assignment was abandoned because it was not argued, and the other did not address the issue underlying the Industrial Commission's conclusion.
- The Court of Appeals should not have used Rule 2 to create an appeal for the appellant and address an issue that the appellant had not properly raised or argued. The Court of Appeals' decision was therefore vacated and the appeal dismissed.
Questions Presented
- Whether the appellee's failure to comply with North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure 10(c)(1) and 28(b)(6) required dismissal of the appeal.
- Whether the Court of Appeals properly used Rule 2 to suspend the appellate rules and reach an issue that was not properly raised or argued.
Disposition
vacated
Cases Cited (3)
- Steingress v. Steingress, 350 N.C. 64, 65, 511 S.E.2d 298, 299 (1999)(followed)
- Viar v. N.C. Dep't of Transp., 162 N.C. App. 362, 375, 590 S.E.2d 909, 919 (2004)(reviewed)
- Bradshaw v. Stansberry, 164 N.C. 356, 79 S.E. 302 (1913)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…