The petition tracker has been updated with the Supreme Court’s most recent rulings on petitions for discretionary review. The Court accepted three new civil cases dealing with various topics such as charter schools, municipal development ordinances, and evictions. The Court will also be reviewing a juvenile delinquency case and (via a petition for writ of certiorari) another TPR case. As always, we will keep you updated as new developments
Since 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, here, here, 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.
In a recent opinion, State v. Rieger, No. COA18-960 (filed 1 October 2019), the Court of Appeals wrestled with what appears to be an issue of first impression: how to calculate court costs following a criminal conviction.
The facts are straightforward. Initially, misdemeanor charges against defendant were heard in district court. After losing there, defendant appealed to superior court, where he was convicted of possession of marijuana and possession
Michelle Connell is one of the few lawyers in North Carolina who is Board-certified in both family law and appellate practice. And as of last week, she’s now part of our appellate team!
I’ve always been amazed at just how many family-law appeals are heard by our Court of Appeals. Pull the latest annual statistical report, and you’ll see: about 20% of that court’s civil docket consists of domestic
Chief Justice Cheri Beasley recently sat down with Tim Boyum of Spectrum News for his podcast Tying It Together. It was a great interview, and we recommend that you check it out. In the process, you ‘ll hear about the Chief Justice’ s childhood and early jobs, as well as her formative years as a public defender. It ‘s good stuff, and it’ s always helpful for practitioners to get a better perspective on our appellate judges.
For the past 25 years, an oral argument before the United States Supreme Court was considered an oddity when an advocate managed to squeeze two or three sentences in before being interrupted by the bench. Last Thursday, the Supreme Court stunned the SCOTUS bar by noting in its newly revised “Guide for Counsel” that the justices “generally” will not ask questions of either party during the first two minutes