From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cannon v. Miller

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Feb 1, 1985
313 N.C. 324 (N.C. 1985)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

holding the Court of Appeals has no authority to overrule decisions of this Court

Summary of this case from Gift Surplus, LLC v. State ex rel. Cooper
See 14 Summaries

Opinion

No. 21P85

Filed 27 February 1985

ORDER

It appearing that the panel of Judges of the Court of Appeals to which this case was assigned has acted under a misapprehension of its authority to overrule decisions of the Supreme Court of North Carolina and its responsibility to follow those decisions, until otherwise ordered by the Supreme Court.

It is therefore ordered that the petition for discretionary review is allowed for the sole purpose of vacating the decision of the Court of Appeals purporting to abolish the causes of action for Alienation of Affections and Criminal Conversation.

The decision of the Court of Appeals is vacated. The case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for entry of an order reversing the order of the trial court granting summary judgment in favor of defendant and remanding the case to the Superior Court of PITT County for trial.

This the 27th day of February, 1985.

VAUGHN, J. For the Court

Summaries of

Cannon v. Miller

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Feb 1, 1985
313 N.C. 324 (N.C. 1985)

holding the Court of Appeals has no authority to overrule decisions of this Court

Summary of this case from Gift Surplus, LLC v. State ex rel. Cooper

holding that this Court lacks authority to overrule decisions of our Supreme Court and possesses a "responsibility to follow those decisions, until otherwise ordered by the Supreme Court"

Summary of this case from Martinez v. Wake Cnty. Bd. of Educ.

holding the Court of Appeals has a “responsibility to follow” decisions of the Supreme Court of North Carolina, “until otherwise ordered” by our Supreme Court

Summary of this case from State v. Lindsay

holding that this Court has a “responsibility to follow” decisions issued by our Supreme Court

Summary of this case from State v. Carver

holding the Court of Appeals has a "responsibility to follow" decisions of the Supreme Court, "until otherwise ordered" by our Supreme Court

Summary of this case from State v. Ledbetter

holding that this Court has a “responsibility to follow” decisions issued by our Supreme Court

Summary of this case from State v. Dunston

holding that this Court has a “responsibility to follow” decisions issued by our Supreme Court

Summary of this case from State v. Garrison

holding that the Court of Appeals lacked the authority to overrule decisions of the Supreme Court of North Carolina and has, instead, a “responsibility to follow those decisions, until otherwise ordered by the Supreme Court”

Summary of this case from State v. Miles

holding that the Court of Appeals lacked the authority to overrule decisions of the Supreme Court of North Carolina and has, instead, a “responsibility to follow those decisions, until otherwise ordered by the Supreme Court”

Summary of this case from Moss v. Moss

holding that the Court of Appeals lacks the authority to overrule decisions of the Supreme Court of North Carolina and has a “responsibility to follow those decisions, until otherwise ordered by the Supreme Court”

Summary of this case from State v. Robinson

holding that the Court of Appeals, after abolishing two tort causes of actions, "acted under a misapprehension of its authority to overrule decisions of the Supreme Court of North Carolina and its responsibility to follow those decisions, until otherwise ordered by the Supreme Court"

Summary of this case from State v. Corbett

vacating a decision of this Court which relied on the authority of other jurisdictions to abolish a cause of action recognized by the North Carolina Supreme Court

Summary of this case from A. Perin Development Co. v. Ty-Par Realty, Inc.

stating this Court lacks authority to overrule decisions of our Supreme Court

Summary of this case from State v. Tripp

abolishing criminal conversation and alienation of affection until the North Carolina Supreme Court vacated the court of appeals' decision on procedural grounds three months later

Summary of this case from Long v. Ostroff
Case details for

Cannon v. Miller

Case Details

Full title:HAYWOOD A. CANNON v. JEFFREY L. MILLER

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Feb 1, 1985

Citations

313 N.C. 324 (N.C. 1985)
327 S.E.2d 888

Citing Cases

State v. Corbett

Although Menna and Hopkins appear to be in conflict with one another, we are bound by the Supreme Court of…

Nunn v. Allen

Neither tort is a statutory creation; both emanate from the common law and have been recognized by our…

74 Citing Cases