Bamberger v. Bernholz
391 S.E.2d 192, 326 N.C. 589
This text of 391 S.E.2d 192 (Bamberger v. Bernholz) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Bamberger v. Bernholz, 391 S.E.2d 192, 326 N.C. 589 (N.C. 1990).
Opinion
William L. BAMBERGER, Jr.
v.
Roger B. BERNHOLZ and Coleman, Bernholz, Dickerson, Bernholz, Gledhill, and Hargrave, a North Carolina General Partnership.
Supreme Court of North Carolina.
*193 Elliot & Pishko, P.A. by David C. Pishko, Winston-Salem, for plaintiff-appellee.
Young, Moore, Henderson & Alvis, P.A. by M. Lee Cheney and Jerry S. Alvis, Raleigh, for defendants-appellants.
PER CURIAM.
The decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed for the reasons stated in Judge Lewis' dissenting opinion.
REVERSED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Young v. Gum
649 S.E.2d 469 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2007)
Kearns v. Horsley
552 S.E.2d 1 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2001)
Summer v. Allran
394 S.E.2d 689 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1990)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
391 S.E.2d 192, 326 N.C. 589, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bamberger-v-bernholz-nc-1990.