From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Disposition of Petitions for Discretionary Review

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Oct 4, 2001
354 N.C. 228 (N.C. 2001)

Summary

holding N.C. Gen. Stat. § 136-34.1 and the Whistleblower Act provide "two avenues to redress violations of the Whistleblower statute"

Summary of this case from Wells v. Dept. of Corr

Opinion


554 S.E.2d 833 (N.C. 2001) 354 N.C. 228 Edwin SWAIN v. Carolyn ELFLAND, et al. No. 539P01. Supreme Court of North Carolina October 4, 2001.

        Ann Reid, Senior Deputy Attorney General, for Carolyn Elfland, et al.

        Motion by Plaintiff to allow Counsel's Verification of Petition for Writ of Certiorari has been filed and the following order entered:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 4th day of October 2001."


Summaries of

Disposition of Petitions for Discretionary Review

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Oct 4, 2001
354 N.C. 228 (N.C. 2001)

holding N.C. Gen. Stat. § 136-34.1 and the Whistleblower Act provide "two avenues to redress violations of the Whistleblower statute"

Summary of this case from Wells v. Dept. of Corr
Case details for

Disposition of Petitions for Discretionary Review

Case Details

Full title:DISPOSITION OF PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Oct 4, 2001

Citations

354 N.C. 228 (N.C. 2001)
354 N.C. 228
553 S.E.2d 686

Citing Cases

Yili Tseng v. Martin

As examples of “matters of public concern,” this Court has previously protected employees alleging sex…

Wiley v. United Parcel Serv., Inc.

Although evidence of retaliation in a case such as this one may often be completely circumstantial, the…