Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

TINA DARLENE LYNCH v. HARRY ALDENE HAZELWOOD

Appeal and Error 46 — evenly divided court — Court of Appeals decision affirmed — no precedent Where one member of the Supreme Court took no part in the consideration or decision of the case, and the remaining six members of the Supreme Court are evenly divided, the decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed and stands without precedential value.

Justice VAUGHN did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

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.

Justice VAUGHN did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

LYNCH v. HAZELWOOD
(Jan 1, 1985)