Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Appellate Law Blogs -> North Carolina Appellate Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Appellate Law
: North Carolina Appellate BlogNC Supreme Court: Right to Non-Mandatory Appeals From Previous Orders In A Case Not Waived Until After A Final Judgment Is Entered
By Sean E. Andrussier
This case involved construction of a will and multiple plaintiffs and defendants. The trial court entered several orders dismissing various defendants, including one entered February 16, 2007. On July 18, 2008 the trial court entered a final consent judgment which acknowledged that the only remaining issues were one of the defendant's liability for a few remaining items in the estate. The consent judgment also stated that it was a final judgment and resolved all outstanding issues. Plaintiffs timely appealed the consent judgment, and also appealed several previously entered orders, including the February 16, 2007 order.
Defendants claimed that Plaintiffs should have filed their notice of appeal within 30days of the orders dismissing the defendants, not the final consent judgment. The trial court and the Court of Appeals dismissed Plaintiffs' appeal.
The Supreme Court granted certiorari on the question of whether Plaintiffs waived their right to appeal the February 16 2007 order by waiting to appeal until the entry of the final consent judgment. The Supreme Court held that the February 16 did not reserve all rights, claims, and liabilities in the case, and was thus interlocutory and not a final order. The February 16 order also did not affect a substantial right of Plaintiffs, and it was not certified for immediate appeal by the trial court, so Plaintiffs couldn't have successfully appealed it within 30 days of its entry. Defendants argued that Plaintiffs had to immediately appeal the order because the case involved title to land, which was a substantial right, but the Court said this was true only in the land condemnation context.
The Court concluded that because there was no final order in the case until the final consent judgment, and because Plaintiffs timely appealed the consent judgment, they did not waive their right to appeal previous orders in the case (including the February 16, 2007 order). The Court vacated the COA's dismissal of Plaintiffs' appeal and remanded for consideration on the merits.
Full post as published by North Carolina Appellate Blog on August 27, 2010 (boomark / email).
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Unwed Fathers' Rights in Adoption
Landmark Cases in Adoption Law Shape Law with respect to Unwed Fathers
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
Heart of Atlanta v United States
Supreme Court Decision: Civil Rights Act Protected by Interstate Commerce Clause
Personal Injury
Appeals Court Upholds Congressional Legislation
Greka Oll and Gas
EPA Orders Clean-up of Toxic PCBs
Final Fantasy XI
Square Enix Faces Class Action over Deceptive Fees and Payments
Parmalat SpA
Italy's biggest dairy company awaits final approval for a securities settlement that would pay investors $10.5 million
Ebay Fined
French Court Sets Fine at $61 Million
Technician Whistleblower
Jury orders DuPont Chambers Works to pay $1.224 million settlement to employee.

Ohio Supreme Court clarifies requirements for trial court "final orders"
Party Cannot Amend Complaint After Final Judgment Entered
Emailed and Oral Orders Not Properly "Rendered"-- Pending Contempt Motions Make Judgment Nonfinal
Improper Rule 54(b) Certification Results in Dismissal of Appeal








