Lazenby v. Godwin

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Lazenby v. Godwin

271 S.E.2d 69, 49 N.C. App. 300, 1980 N.C. App. LEXIS 3373

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedOctober 21, 1980

DocketNo. 8014SC352

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 271 S.E.2d 69 (Lazenby v. Godwin) 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

Lazenby v. Godwin, 271 S.E.2d 69, 49 N.C. App. 300, 1980 N.C. App. LEXIS 3373 (N.C. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

MARTIN (Harry C.), Judge.

Plaintiffs attempt to appeal from a pretrial order entered pursuant to Rule 16 of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Proce[301]*301dure. The pretrial order is interlocutory and is not appealable. Green v. Insurance Co., 250 N.C. 730, 110 S.E. 2d 321 (1959); DeBruhl v. Highway Com., 241 N.C. 616, 86 S.E. 2d 202 (1955). While Green involved interpreting former N.C.G.S. 1-169.1, repealed 1 January 1970, the language pertinent to that appeal is almost identical to the applicable portion of the present Rule 16. The former statute reads: “Such order shall control the subsequent course of the case unless in the discretion of the trial judge the ends of justice require its modification.” Rule 16 states: “[S]uch order when entered controls the subsequent course of the action, unless modified at the trial to prevent manifest injustice.” (Emphasis added.) The rule permits modification of the pretrial order by the trial court judge when necessary to prevent manifest injustice.

This Court continues to adhere to the principle set forth in Green, supra. Board of Transportation v. Gragg, 38 N.C. App. 740, 248 S.E. 2d 763 (1978); Realty, Inc. v. City of High Point, 36 N.C. App. 154, 242 S.E. 2d 895 (1978); Knight v. Power Co., 34 N.C. App. 218, 237 S.E. 2d 574 (1977).

The appeal is dismissed.

Judges Hedrick and Martin (Robert M.) concur.

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

MARTIN (Harry C.), Judge.

Plaintiffs attempt to appeal from a pretrial order entered pursuant to Rule 16 of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Proce[301]*301dure. The pretrial order is interlocutory and is not appealable. Green v. Insurance Co., 250 N.C. 730, 110 S.E. 2d 321 (1959); DeBruhl v. Highway Com., 241 N.C. 616, 86 S.E. 2d 202 (1955). While Green involved interpreting former N.C.G.S. 1-169.1, repealed 1 January 1970, the language pertinent to that appeal is almost identical to the applicable portion of the present Rule 16. The former statute reads: “Such order shall control the subsequent course of the case unless in the discretion of the trial judge the ends of justice require its modification.” Rule 16 states: “[S]uch order when entered controls the subsequent course of the action, unless modified at the trial to prevent manifest injustice.” (Emphasis added.) The rule permits modification of the pretrial order by the trial court judge when necessary to prevent manifest injustice.

This Court continues to adhere to the principle set forth in Green, supra. Board of Transportation v. Gragg, 38 N.C. App. 740, 248 S.E. 2d 763 (1978); Realty, Inc. v. City of High Point, 36 N.C. App. 154, 242 S.E. 2d 895 (1978); Knight v. Power Co., 34 N.C. App. 218, 237 S.E. 2d 574 (1977).

The appeal is dismissed.

Judges Hedrick and Martin (Robert M.) concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 S.E.2d 69, 49 N.C. App. 300, 1980 N.C. App. LEXIS 3373, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lazenby-v-godwin-ncctapp-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack