Opinion · Supreme Court of North Carolina

Neill Grading & Construction Co. v. Lingafelt

360 N.C. 172

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction
North Carolina
Date
2005-12-16
Topic
general

PER CURIAM. DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IMPROVIDENTLY ALLOWED.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Neill Grading & Construction Co. v. Lingafelt. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
3 opinions
NEILL GRADING CONSTR. CO. v. LINGAFELT,360 N.C. 172(2005)
NEILL GRADING CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. v. DAVID B. LINGAFELT AND
NEWTON CONOVER COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
No. 112PA05.
Supreme Court of North Carolina.
Filed December 16, 2005.
On discretionary review pursuant to N.C.G.S. §7A-31of a unanimous decision of the Court of Appeals,168 N.C. App. 36,606 S.E.2d 734(2005), dismissing an interlocutory appeal from an order denying summary judgment entered 17 November 2003 by Judge Robert C. Ervin in Superior Court, Catawba County. Heard in the Supreme Court 16 November 2005.
Patrick, Harper Dixon L.L.P., by Stephen M. Thomasand Michael J. Barnett, for plaintiff-appellee.Brooks, Pierce, McLendon, Humphrey Leonard, L.L.P.,by Mark J. Prak and Charles E. Coble, fordefendant-appellants.The Bussian Law Firm, PLLC, by John A. Bussian, for NorthCarolina Association of Broadcasters and North Carolina PressAssociation, amid curiae.
PER CURIAM.
DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IMPROVIDENTLY ALLOWED.Page 173