Terasaka v. AT&T
634 S.E.2d 888, 360 N.C. 584, 2006 N.C. LEXIS 1041
Opinion
As to the appeal of right based on the dissenting opinion, we affirm the majority decision of the Court of Appeals. We conclude that the petition for discretionary review as to additional issues was improvidently allowed.
AFFIRMED; DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IMPROVIDENTLY ALLOWED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Terasaka v. AT&T, 634 S.E.2d 888, 360 N.C. 584, 2006 N.C. LEXIS 1041 (N.C. 2006).
634 S.E.2d 888 (Terasaka v. AT&T) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Newnam v. New Hanover Regional Medical Center
711 S.E.2d 194 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2011)
Goodson v. MAFCO HOLDINGS, INC.
674 S.E.2d 478 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2009)
Lathon v. Cumberland County
646 S.E.2d 565 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2007)