General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Feder

184 S.E.2d 383, 12 N.C. App. 696, 1971 N.C. App. LEXIS 1440
CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina
DecidedNovember 17, 1971
DocketNo. 7126DC678
StatusPublished

This text of 184 S.E.2d 383 (General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Feder) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Feder, 184 S.E.2d 383, 12 N.C. App. 696, 1971 N.C. App. LEXIS 1440 (N.C. Ct. App. 1971).

Opinion

GRAHAM, Judge.

Plaintiff has filed a written motion in this court asking that defendant’s appeal be dismissed on the ground the order appealed from is an interlocutory order from which no immediate right of appeal lies.

Rule 4, Rules of Practice in the Court of Appeals of North Carolina, as amended by the Supreme Court on 20 January 1971, provides:

“4. The Court of Appeals will not entertain an appeal:
From the ruling on an interlocutory motion, unless provided for elsewhere. Any interested party may enter an exception to the ruling on the motion and present the question thus raised to this Court on the final appeal; provided, that when any interested party conceives that he will suffer substantial harm from the ruling on the motion, unless the ruling is reviewed by this Court prior to the trial of the cause on its merits, he may petition this Court for a writ of certiorari within thirty days from the date of the entry of the order ruling on the motion.”

An order denying a motion to dismiss an action is an interlocutory order from which no immediate right of appeal lies. Johnson v. Insurance Co., 215 N.C. 120, 1 S.E. 2d 381; Acorn v. Knitting Corp., 12 N.C. App. 266, 182 S.E. 2d 862. Plaintiff has not petitioned for a writ of certiorari nor has he attempted to show that the order in question affects a substantial right. See G.S. 1-277.

[698]*698The order entered denying defendant’s motion to dismiss this action is an interlocutory order and plaintiff’s motion to dismiss defendant’s appeal from the order is allowed.

We have nevertheless reviewed the record and are of the opinion the trial court did not err in denying defendant’s motion to dismiss.

Appeal dismissed.

Chief Judge Mallard and Judge Hedrick concur.

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

Related

Acorn v. JONES KNITTING CORPORATION
182 S.E.2d 862 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1971)
Johnson v. Pilot Life Insurance
1 S.E.2d 381 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1939)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
184 S.E.2d 383, 12 N.C. App. 696, 1971 N.C. App. LEXIS 1440, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/general-motors-acceptance-corp-v-feder-ncctapp-1971.