North Carolina – Case Law Wire

North Carolina Contract Interpretation Employment

North Carolina Court of Appeals

Sepanski v. Ashleigh Fisher Consulting — ‘Monthly Retainer Fee’ Means Payment for Work Completed, Not Availability During Notice Period

/ July 17, 2026

The North Carolina Court of Appeals reversed a $26,633 summary judgment for a consultant who claimed she was owed two months of “monthly retainer fees” during a sixty-day notice period in which she performed no work. Reading the contract as a whole, the court held that “retainer fee” does not mean availability payment; the early-termination clause—which conditioned payment on “work completed through the end of the notice period”—controlled. Because the consultant performed no work after termination, Fisher Consulting owed nothing. Summary judgment for the defendant was ordered on remand.

North Carolina domestic-violence Family Law

North Carolina Court of Appeals

Uncategorized

Zubchevich v. Zubchevich — Grabbing Child by Neck to Place in Car Seat Constitutes ‘Intentionally Causing Bodily Injury’ Under NC Domestic Violence Statute

/ July 17, 2026

The North Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed a Domestic Violence Protective Order entered against a father who grabbed his seven-year-old son by the neck and hip and carried him to his car seat, causing the child to feel dizzy, experience difficulty breathing, and turn red in the face. A 2–1 majority held that competent evidence supported the finding of “intentionally causing bodily injury” under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 50B-1(a)(1) even absent a visible mark. The court also held that minor children have standing to seek DVPOs against parents through a Guardian ad litem. Judge Wood dissented, arguing that routine parental discipline without lasting injury cannot constitute domestic violence.

North Carolina Appellate Procedure Criminal

North Carolina Court of Appeals

Uncategorized

State v. Simpson — Rule of Lenity Bars Two Concealed-Weapon Convictions for a Single Incident; Probation Period Also Vacated

/ July 17, 2026

The North Carolina Court of Appeals vacated a consolidated judgment entering two counts of carrying a concealed firearm under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-269(a1) arising from discovery of two guns in a single traffic stop. Applying the rule of lenity under the Conley line of cases, the court held that § 14-269(a1)’s “any pistol or gun” language is ambiguous as to unit of prosecution, permitting only one conviction per incident. The court also vacated a twenty-four-month probationary term imposed without the specific written findings required to exceed the statutory eighteen-month cap.

North Carolina Appellate Procedure Legal Ethics

North Carolina Court of Appeals

Uncategorized

N.C. State Bar v. Cummings — DHC’s Five-Year Suspension Vacated in Part; Hearsay and Willfulness Failures Undermine Three of Four Misconduct Findings

/ July 17, 2026

The North Carolina Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed a DHC finding that attorney Mark Cummings lied to Bar investigators about compensating a paralegal, but vacated three other misconduct findings—on failure to file 1099s (no willfulness finding by the DHC), a courtroom recording device (no evidence of an actual misrepresentation), and a residency misrepresentation (prior out-of-court statement inadmissible under Rules 804(b)(5) and 803(24) because the declarant testified live at the hearing). The case was remanded for the DHC to reconsider appropriate discipline based only on the violations that survived review.

North Carolina Civil Procedure Eminent Domain Real Estate

North Carolina Court of Appeals

Uncategorized

Great Smoky Mountains R.R. v. Mach 2 Invs. — Third Parties Cannot Attack a Railroad’s Deed from NCDOT, Even If State Conveyance Procedures Were Not Followed

/ July 17, 2026

The North Carolina Court of Appeals reversed a Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal in a railroad trespass and quiet-title action, holding that Mach 2 Investments and adjoining property owners lacked standing under the jus tertii doctrine to challenge Great Smoky Mountains Railroad’s 1996 deed from NCDOT. Even if the conveyance did not strictly follow state-lands procedures, only the State can mount that challenge—and any defect would render the deed merely voidable, not void. On remand, the trial court must address necessary parties and examine the scope of a historic “farm crossing” easement whose claimed use Mach 2 may have overburdened through subdivision.

North Carolina Contract Interpretation Employment

North Carolina Court of Appeals

Uncategorized

Se. Reg’l Physician Servs. v. Scott — Non-Compete Barring Any ‘Practice of Medicine’ Is Overbroad and Cannot Be Blue-Penciled

/ July 17, 2026

The North Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed the invalidation of non-compete agreements barring two nurse practitioners from “engaging in the practice of Medicine” for one year within Robeson County and a 35-mile radius. Writing for the majority, Judge Griffin held the covenants overbroad in their terms despite reasonable time and geographic limits, void against public policy, and not salvageable through blue-penciling under North Carolina’s strict severance doctrine. The 2–1 decision—Chief Judge Dillon dissenting—clarifies that healthcare non-competes must track the specific work performed, not broadly prohibit all medical practice.