Suppose the Supreme Court of North Carolina jettisoned In re Civil Penalty—the case requiring panels of the Court of Appeals to treat earlier Court of Appeals panel opinions as binding precedent. What system would take its place?
This is no mere hypothetical. As my colleague Morgan Reece pointed out last week, at least
On March 20, the Supreme Court issued an opinion in In re N.M.W., No. 159PA25, 2026 WL 796105 (N.C. Mar. 20, 2026). But as many of you know, I’m not here to discuss the holding or outcome of that case. I want to talk about Justice Berger’s concurrence.
Background first. Readers of this blog will
North Carolina appellate practitioners may want to sit down before reading this. Actually, maybe stand up—because you might need to spring into action sooner than you think.
The North Carolina Supreme Court appears to be running a tighter schedule for briefing and calendaring cases for oral argument. In some cases, the Court has issued oral
Sometimes you fall headlong into a chorus you thought you knew by heart—only to discover the bridge is where all the action is. For appellate practitioners, that action seems to be happening more and more in orders issued by the North Carolina Court of Appeals. The latest big order highlights how trial attorneys in criminal
As I forecasted two weeks ago, the State v. Hardaway case could present a clean opportunity for the North Carolina Court of Appeals to hold its first-ever en banc (re)hearing. Yesterday, we took a step closer to having that become a reality, as the defendant has now moved for rehearing en banc and for a
Yesterday, I posted on the State v. Hardaway case and the use of a “concurrence dubitante” by Judge Hampson to flag his concerns with the binding holding of the earlier-decided State v. Jenkins case.
Having thought a bit more about the cases, I think this dispute has as good a chance as any to lead
In 1904, North Carolina Supreme Court Justice Robert M. Douglas wrote a separate opinion in a case called Westbrooks v. Wilson, 135 N.C. 400, expressing some reservations about the majority’s opinion. He signed his opinion “Douglas, J. (dubitante),” using the Latin word for “doubting.”
No North Carolina judge has entered a “dubitante” opinion since. Until
This blog has spent a lot of ink discussing file stamps. Indeed, two Halloweens ago we devoted an entire blog post to the ghoulish topic of missing file stamps and sua sponte dismissals.
I’m happy to report that file-stamp dismissals appear to be dying down. I believe there are several reasons why.
My hope
Yesterday, the Supreme Court of North Carolina amended Appellate Rule 36(b) to conform with the General Assembly’s recent amendment to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-283. Both under the Appellate Rule and by statute, settling the record on appeal is an action that must be taken by a particular judicial official: the judge whose order
It’s the stuff of nightmares: you drop your notice of appeal in the mail 24 days after a summary-judgment order is entered against your client, trusting the post office will manage to get it into the clerk’s hands for filing by day 30. Then, on day 30, you find out that the clerk never received