Opinion · Supreme Court of North Carolina
Maraman v. Cooper Steel Fabricators
355 N.C. 482
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of North Carolina
- Jurisdiction
- North Carolina
- Date
- 2002-05-10
- Topic
- general
How later courts describe this case
- affirming the Court of Appeals' opinion in part and reversing the Court of Appeals' opinion in part because "a portion of the majority opinion was erroneously designated a dissent, while a portion of the dissent was found in what purported to be the majority opinion"
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Maraman v. Cooper Steel Fabricators. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 5 opinions
We reverse that portion of the Court of Appeals’ opinion that found error in the trial court’s entry of directed verdict for defendant Cooper Steel Fabricators.
We affirm that portion of the Court of Appeals’ opinion that affirmed the trial court’s entry of directed verdict for defendant James N. Gray Company.
The Court of Appeals is once again reminded of its responsibility to issue opinions in which the holding is readily understandable to the bench and bar. Knight Pub’g Co. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A., 131 N.C. App. 257, 506 S.E.2d 728 (1998), remanded for modification, 351 N.C. 98, 540 S.E.2d 36 (1999); Jones v. Asheville Radiological Grp., P.A., 129 N.C. App. 449, 500 S.E.2d 740 (1998), remanded with instructions, 350 N.C. 654, 517 S.E.2d 380 (1999). The Court of Appeals’ opinion in this case, in which a portion of the majority opinion was erroneously designated a dissent, while a portion of the dissent was found in what purported to be the majority opinion, was confusing and inappropriate.
REVERSED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART.