On Tuesday, Troy posted on the uncertainty surrounding how North Carolina appeals are being impacted by the coronavirus pandemic.  On Thursday, the Supreme Court issued a catastrophic conditions order extending deadlines and other court proceedings for one month. Notably, this extension order does not apply to documents filed or acts to be done in the appellate courts. (But see final two paragraphs below).… Continue Reading

Last Friday, Chief Justice Beasley of the Supreme Court of North Carolina, held a press conference on the State judiciary’s response to the coronavirus pandemic.  Most of the announcements during the conference focused on the trial courts.  But there was also some information given during the press conference, and since then, about how the appellate courts are dealing with the pandemic.… Continue Reading

Last Amish Horse and Carriageweek, the Court of Appeals returned to a general question that this blog has addressed before: When is a Notice of Appeal Filing Deadline or Requirement Jurisdictional?  In this instance, the specific issue was whether the Court has jurisdiction over an appeal when a notice of appeal was filed and the record on appeal was filed and the appeal docketed before the trial court entered the order that was being appealed.… Continue Reading

It continues to amaze me how difficult it is for the public to access basic information about the upcoming elections for open seats on the Supreme Court of North Carolina and the Court of Appeals.  While stories with political angles find their way into the press, the fundamentals—which seats are open, why those seats are open, who is running, why voters should care—get little coverage. … Continue Reading

In an earlier post, Beth detailed best practices for when a Rule 59 motion will successfully toll the 30-day appeal period under Appellate Rule 3.  See here.  To recap, tolling requires a “proper” Rule 59 motion—which means meeting a litany of requirements, including that the motion: (i) seeks relief from a final judgment; (ii) generally applies only to post-trial judgments; (iii) seeks relief pursuant to one or more grounds listed in Rule 59(a); (iv) seeks a valid form of relief from the contested final judgment; and (v) does not reargue matters already decided by the trial court. … Continue Reading

Time ClockNo, this post is not a tribute to David Ives. In many appellate cases, it really is all in the timing.

Some appellate rules regarding timing are easy to state. The deadlines to file a notice of appeal, an opening brief, and a petition for discretionary review are relatively straightforward.

But other timing issues are less obvious. The most recent set of opinions from the Court of Appeals addresses several of these thornier problems.… Continue Reading

scary pictureSince 2015, this blog has frequently discussed whether the text of Appellate Rule 21 places restrictions on the Court of Appeals’ authority to grant relief by writ of certiorari.   See here, here, here, here, herehere, and here.   The Supreme Court has also written frequently about whether the text of Appellate Rule 21 places restrictions on the Court of Appeals’ discretionary authority to grant relief by writ of certiorari.… Continue Reading

I.  You Can’t Have One Without the Other: Notice of Appeal Must Designate Both Final Judgment and Intermediate Order

Approximately three years ago, I blogged on Majerske v. Majerske, an unpublished Court of Appeals decision that dismissed an appeal for a notice of appeal defect.  Reason: The notice of appeal identified the intermediate order that the appellant was challenging on appeal, but not the trial court order that converted the case into a final judgment.… Continue Reading

Back in March, the Court of Appeals in Ramsey v. Ramsey dismissed a party’s appeal for cumulative non-jurisdictional violations that the Court described as “gross and substantial noncompliance with the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.” (See prior posts on Ramsey here and here.)  On Tuesday, in K2HN Construction, NC, LLC v. Five D Contractors, Inc., the Court dismissed another appeal that had a tortured relationship with the State’s appellate rules. … Continue Reading

As noted yesterday, the Supreme Court has been busy. Need further proof? How about the fact that the Supreme Court considered 279 “other matters” on Friday— a category that includes rulings on various substantive motions, PDRs, and writ petitions. By way of comparison, the number of “other matters” considered by the Supreme Court fell within the 134 to 182 range the last few times that opinions were released.… Continue Reading