Lynch v. Hazelwood
This text of 324 S.E.2d 224 (Lynch v. Hazelwood) 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.
Opinion
Tina Darlene LYNCH
v.
Harry Aldene HAZELWOOD.
Supreme Court of North Carolina.
Pollock, Fullenwider, Cunningham & Patterson by Bruce T. Cunningham, Jr., Southern Pines, for plaintiff-appellant.
Staton, Perkinson, West & Doster by Norman C. Post, Jr., Sanford, for defendant-appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The Court is evenly divided. Under these circumstances, following the uniform practice of this Court and the ancient rule of praesumitur pro negante, the decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed, not as precedent but as the decision in this case. Durham v. R.R., 113 N.C. 240, 18 S.E. 208 (1893); Reg. v. Millis, 8 Eng.Rep. 844 (1844).
AFFIRMED.
VAUGHN, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
324 S.E.2d 224, 312 N.C. 224, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lynch-v-hazelwood-nc-1985.