Cannon v. Miller

holding that this Court has a “responsibility to follow” decisions issued by our Supreme Court | holding that this Court has a “responsibility to follow” decisions issued by our Supreme Court | holding that this Court lacks authority to overrule decisions of our Supreme Court and possesses a "responsibility to follow those decisions, until otherwise ordered by the Supreme Court" | holding that the Court of Appeals lacks the authority to overrule decisions of the Supreme Court of North Carolina and has a “responsibility to follow those decisions, until otherwise ordered by the Supreme Court” | holding that the Court of Appeals lacked the authority to overrule decisions of the Supreme Court of North Carolina and has, instead, a “responsibility to follow those decisions, until otherwise ordered by the Supreme Court” | holding that the Court of Appeals lacked the authority to overrule decisions of the Supreme Court of North Carolina and has, instead, a “responsibility to follow those decisions, until otherwise ordered by the Supreme Court” | holding the Court of Appeals has a "responsibility to follow" decisions of the Supreme Court, "until otherwise ordered" by our Supreme Court | iterating that this Court does not have the authority to overrule decisions of the Supreme Court of North Carolina | holding the Court of Appeals has a “responsibility to follow” decisions of the Supreme Court, “until otherwise ordered” by our Supreme Court | holding that the Court of Appeals, after abolishing two tort causes of actions, "acted under a misapprehension of its authority to overrule decisions of the Supreme Court of North Carolina and its responsibility to follow those decisions, until otherwise ordered by the Supreme Court" | holding that the Court of Appeals, after abolishing two tort causes of actions, “acted under a misapprehension of its authority to overrule decisions of the Supreme Court of North Carolina and its responsibility to follow those decisions, until otherwise ordered by the Supreme Court” | holding the Court of Appeals has no authority to overrule decisions of this Court | holding the Court of Appeals has no authority to overrule decisions of this Court | abolishing criminal conversation and alienation of affection until the North Carolina Supreme Court vacated the court of appeals’ decision on procedural grounds three months later | vacating a decision of this Court which relied on the authority of other jurisdictions to abolish a cause of action recognized by the North Carolina Supreme Court | noting the Court of Appeals’ “responsibility to follow th[e] decisions [of the Supreme Court of North Carolina], until otherwise ordered by the Supreme Court” | stating this Court lacks authority to overrule decisions of our Supreme Court | stating this Court lacks authority to overrule decisions of our Supreme Court | the causes of action for alienation of affections and criminal conversation are still in existence | the causes of action for alienation of affections and criminal conversation are still in existence | the causes of action for alienation of affections and criminal conversation are still in existence | The Court of Appeals has a “responsibility to follow” decisions of the North Carolina Supreme Court, until otherwise ordered by the Supreme Court. | “[i]t is the province of our legislature to change the accepted common law in this state” | N.C. Court of Appeals has responsibility to follow decisions of North Carolina Supreme Court “until otherwise ordered” by that Court | N.C. Court of Appeals has responsibility to follow decisions of North Carolina Supreme Court "until otherwise ordered" by that Court | the causes of action for criminal conversation and alienation of affections are recognized and valid in North Carolina | the causes of action for criminal conversation and alienation of affections are recognized and valid in North Carolina | the Court of Appeals lacks authority to overrule decisions of the Supreme Cou