Erthal v. May

736 S.E.2d 761, 366 N.C. 421, 2013 WL 363433, 2013 N.C. LEXIS 152

Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided January 24, 2013·No. 003P13·Published

Opinion

1. Pits’ (Jerome A. Budde, Jr., and llena Budde) NOA Based Upon a Dissent (COA12-603)

2. Pits’ (Jerome A. Budde, Jr. and llena Budde) PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

3. Defs’ Conditional PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

4. Pits’ (Jerome A. Budde, Jr. and llena Budde) Motion to Deem a Concurring Opinion a Dissenting Opinion

Beasley, J., Recused

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

1. Pits’ (Jerome A. Budde, Jr., and llena Budde) NOA Based Upon a Dissent (COA12-603)

2. Pits’ (Jerome A. Budde, Jr. and llena Budde) PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

3. Defs’ Conditional PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

4. Pits’ (Jerome A. Budde, Jr. and llena Budde) Motion to Deem a Concurring Opinion a Dissenting Opinion

Beasley, J., Recused

Erthal v. May, 736 S.E.2d 761, 366 N.C. 421, 2013 WL 363433, 2013 N.C. LEXIS 152 (N.C. 2013).

Pincite

736 S.E.2d 761 (Erthal v. May) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.