Opinion · Supreme Court of North Carolina
Haywood v. Haywood
333 N.C. 342
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of North Carolina
- Jurisdiction
- North Carolina
- Date
- 1993-02-12
- Topic
- general
How later courts describe this case
- finding that the failure to mention a requirement in a statute indicated an intent to exclude it
- post-separation payments treated as distributional factor
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Haywood v. Haywood. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 19 opinions
PER CURIAM.
Defendant’s petition for discretionary review as to additional issues having been denied on 24 June 1992, our review is limited solely to the issues raised in the dissent. As to each such issue, the decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed for the reasons stated in the dissent by Judge Wynn, 106 N.C. App. at 101, 415 S.E.2d at 571. The case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this holding.
REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED.
Justices WHICHARD and PARKER did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.