Beck v. Carolina Power & Light Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Beck v. Carolina Power & Light Co.

297 S.E.2d 397, 307 N.C. 267, 1982 N.C. LEXIS 1678

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedDecember 7, 1982

Docket398A82

StatusPublished

Cited by24 cases

This text of 297 S.E.2d 397 (Beck v. Carolina Power & Light Co.) 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

Beck v. Carolina Power & Light Co., 297 S.E.2d 397, 307 N.C. 267, 1982 N.C. LEXIS 1678 (N.C. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The facts in this case are fully stated in the decision of the Court of Appeals. Judge (now Justice) Harry C. Martin participated in the decision of this case as a member of the Court of Appeals and therefore took no part in the consideration or deci *268 sion of the appeal before this Court. The remaining members of this Court were equally divided, three members voting to affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals and three members voting to reverse. Therefore the decision of the Court of Appeals is left undisturbed as the law of the case but stands without precedential value.

Affirmed.

Justice MARTIN took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The facts in this case are fully stated in the decision of the Court of Appeals. Judge (now Justice) Harry C. Martin participated in the decision of this case as a member of the Court of Appeals and therefore took no part in the consideration or deci *268 sion of the appeal before this Court. The remaining members of this Court were equally divided, three members voting to affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals and three members voting to reverse. Therefore the decision of the Court of Appeals is left undisturbed as the law of the case but stands without precedential value.

Affirmed.

Justice MARTIN took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

prod.liab.rep.(cch)p 13,625 Linda P. Horne, of the Estate of Benny Gerald Horne, and Benny Gerald Horne v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, and Ac & S, Incorporated, a Pennsylvania Corporation Amchem Products, Incorporated the Celotex Corporation, Individually and as Successor Manufacturing Company, Philip Carey Corporation, Panacon Corporation, Glen Alden Corporation, Rapid American Corporation, Briggs Manufacturing Company, and Smith and Kanzler, a Delaware Corporation C.E. Thurston & Sons, a Virginia Corporation Combustion Engineering, Incorporated Crown Cork & Seal Company, Incorporated, Individually and as Successor in Interest to Mundet Cork Corporation, a New York Corporation Eagle-Picher Industries, Incorporated, an Ohio Corporation Flintkote Company, a Massachusetts Corporation Fireboard Corporation, Pabco Industrial Products Division, a Delawarecorporation Gaf Corporation, a Delaware Corporation W.R. Grace & Company, a Connecticut Corporation A.P. Greene Refractories Company Keene Corporation, Individually and as Successor in Interest to Keene Building Products Corporation, Keene Insulation Products Corporation, Ehret-Magnesia Manufacturing Company, Baldwin-Ehret-Hill, Incorporated, Baldwin-Hill Company, and Mundet Cork Corporation, a New York Corporation National Gypsum Company, a Delaware Corporation Owens-Illinois, Incorporated, an Ohio Corporation Pittsburgh-Corning Corporation, Individually and as Successor in Interest to Union Asbestos and Rubber Company (Unarco), a Pennsylvania Corporation H.K. Porter Company, Incorporated, Individually and as Successor in Interest to Southern Asbestos, Carolina Asbestos, Thermoid and Tullman-Mccluskey, a Delaware Corporation Raymark Industries, Incorporated, Successor in Interest to Raybestos-Manhattan, Incorporated Rock Wool Manufacturing Company, Incorporated, an Alabama Corporation Turner & Newall, P.L.C., Individually and as Alter Ego of Keasby & Mattison United States Gypsum Company, Inc. Armstrong World Industries, Incorporated, Formerly Known as Armstrong Cork Company, a Pennsylvania Corporation, General Refractories/grefco, Incorporated, U.S. Refractories Division, and Third Party v. Manville Corporation Asbestos Disease Compensation Fund, Third Party

4 F.3d 276 (Third Circuit, 1993)

Morgan v. Cavalier Acquisition Corp.

432 S.E.2d 915 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1993)

Cowan v. Brian Center Management Corp.

428 S.E.2d 263 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1993)

Boyd v. LG DeWitt Trucking Co., Inc.

405 S.E.2d 914 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1991)

Wilkinson v. Cruz

396 S.E.2d 811 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1990)

Ward v. McDonald

396 S.E.2d 337 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1990)

Stutts v. Adair

380 S.E.2d 411 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1989)

Tatum v. Schering Corp.

523 So. 2d 1042 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1988)

Wells v. French Broad Electric Membership Corp.

315 S.E.2d 316 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

297 S.E.2d 397, 307 N.C. 267, 1982 N.C. LEXIS 1678, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beck-v-carolina-power-light-co-nc-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack