DOCSLIB.ORG

North Carolina Court of Appeals Reports

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
North Carolina Court of Appeals Reports NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS REPORTS VOLUME 242 7 JULY 2015 18 AUGUST 2015 RALEIGH 2018 CITE THIS VOLUME 242 N.C. APP. TABLE OF CONTENTS Judges of the Court of Appeals .......................... v Table of Cases Reported ................................ vii Table of Cases Reported Without Published Opinions ....... viii Opinions of the Court of Appeals ........................ 1-679 Headnote Index ....................................... 681 iii This volume is printed on permanent, acid-free paper in compliance with the North Carolina General Statutes. iv THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA Chief Judge LINDA M. McGEE Judges WANDA G. BRYANT JOHN M. TYSON ANN MARIE CALABRIA LUCY INMAN RICHARD A. ELMORE VALERIE J. ZACHARY DONNA S. STROUD WENDY M. ENOCHS1 ROBERT N. HUNTER, JR. PHIL BERGER, JR.2 CHRIS DILLON HUNTER MURPHY3 MARK DAVIS JOHN S. ARROWOOD4 RICHARD D. DIETZ Emergency Recall Judges GERALD ARNOLD RALPH A. WALKER Former Chief Judges GERALD ARNOLD SIDNEY S. EAGLES, JR. JOHN C. MARTIN Former Judges WILLIAM E. GRAHAM, JR. K. EDWARD GREENE JAMES H. CARSON, JR. RALPH A. WALKER J. PHIL CARLTON HUGH B. CAMPBELL, JR. BURLEY B. MITCHELL, JR. ALBERT S. THOMAS, JR. HARRY C. MARTIN LORETTA COPELAND BIGGS E. MAURICE BRASWELL ALAN Z. THORNBURG WILLIS P. WHICHARD PATRICIA TIMMONS-GOODSON DONALD L. SMITH ROBIN E. HUDSON CHARLES L. BECTON ERIC L. LEVINSON ALLYSON K. DUNCAN JAMES A. WYNN, JR. SARAH PARKER BARBARA A. JACKSON ELIZABETH G. McCRODDEN CHERI BEASLEY ROBERT F. ORR CRESSIE H. THIGPEN, JR. SYDNOR THOMPSON ROBERT C. HUNTER JACK COZORT LISA C. BELL MARK D. MARTIN SAMUEL J. ERVIN, IV JOHN B. LEWIS, JR. SANFORD L. STEELMAN, JR. CLARENCE E. HORTON, JR. MARTHA GEER JOSEPH R. JOHN, SR. LINDA STEPHENS5 ROBERT H. EDMUNDS, JR. J. DOUGLAS McCULLOUGH6 JAMES C. FULLER 1Appointed 1 August 2016 2Sworn in 1 January 2017 3Sworn in 1 January 2016 4Appointed 24 April 2017 5Retired 31 December 2016 6Retired 24 April 2017 v Clerk DANIEL M. HORNE, JR. Assistant Clerk SHELLEY LUCAS EDWARDS OFFICE OF STAFF COUNSEL Director Leslie Hollowell Davis Assistant Director David Alan Lagos Staff Attorneys John L. Kelly Bryan A. Meer Eugene H. Soar Nikiann Tarantino Gray Michael W. Rodgers Lauren M. Tierney Justice D. Warren ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS Director Marion R. Warren Assistant Director David F. Hoke OFFICE OF APPELLATE DIVISION REPORTER H. James Hutcheson Kimberly Woodell Sieredzki Jennifer C. Peterson vi CASES REPORTED PAGE PAGE Builders Mut. Ins. Co. v. Doug Besaw Kearney v. Bolling ................ 67 Enters., Inc. .................. 254 Malinak v. Malinak ............... 609 China Grove 152, LLC v. Town of McCauley v. Thomas .............. 82 China Grove .................. 1 Murphy v. Hinton ................ 95 Cumberland Cnty. Hosp. Sys., Inc. v. N.C. Dep’t of Health & Nelson v. State Emps. Credit Union ... 447 Human Servs. ................. 524 Neusoft Med. Sys., USA Inc. v. Neuisys, LLC ................ 102 Davis v. Williams ................. 262 Dep’t of Transp. v. BB&R, LLC ..... 11 Patterson v. Patterson ............ 114 Doe v. Roman Catholic Diocese Philips v. Pitt Cnty. Mem’l of Charlotte ................... 538 Hosp., Inc. .................... 456 Earl v. CGR Dev. Corp. ............ 20 Robinson v. Univ. of N.C. Health Ellison v. Ellison ................. 386 Care Sys. ..................... 614 Estate of Jacobs v. State of N.C. .... 396 Salzer v. King Kong Zoo ........... 120 Faucette v. 6303 Carmel Rd., LLC ... 267 State v. Calderon ................. 125 Fowler v. N.C. Dep’t of Revenue .... 404 State v. Clark .................... 141 State v. Edgar .................... 624 Gentry v. N.C. Dep’t of Health State v. Edgerton ................. 460 & Human Servs. ............... 424 State v. Hardy ................... 146 Good Neighbors of Or. Hill Protecting State v. Harris ................... 162 Prop. Rights v. Cnty. State v. Holanek ................. 633 of Rockingham ................ 280 State v. Hoskins .................. 168 State v. Ingram ................... 173 Head v. Adams Farm Living, Inc. ... 546 State v. James ................... 188 Holliday v. Tropical Nut State v. Jordan ................... 464 & Fruit Co. ................... 562 State v. Lowe .................... 335 House of Raeford Farms, Inc. State v. Mangum ................. 202 v. N.C. Dep’t of Env’t ........... 294 State v. Oxendine ................ 216 State v. Purcell ................... 222 In re D.L.P. ...................... 597 State v. Rorie .................... 655 In re Estate of Pickelsimer ........ 582 State v. Saldierna ................. 347 In re J.A.U. ...................... 603 State v. Sullivan .................. 230 In re K.M.M. ..................... 25 State v. Thomsen ................. 475 In re M.A.E. ..................... 312 State v. Warren .................. 496 In re P.S. ........................ 430 State v. Williams ................. 361 In re Taylor ..................... 30 Stikeleather Realty & Invs. Co. Izydore v. Tokuta ................. 434 v. Broadway .................. 507 Jackson v. N.C. Dep’t of Com. Div. Thomas v. Williams ............... 236 of Emp’t Sec. ................. 328 Times News Publ’g Co. John Doe 200 v. Diocese of Raleigh . 42 v. Alamance-Burlington Bd. Juhnn v. Juhnn ................... 58 of Educ. ...................... 375 vii CASES REPORTED PAGE PAGE Total Renal Care of N.C., LLC v. N.C. Dep’t United Cmty. Bank v. Wolfe ........ 245 of Health & Human Servs. ...... 666 CASES REPORTED WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINIONS PAGE PAGE Battle v. Meadowbrook Meat In re B.B.M.B. ................... 383 Co., Inc. ...................... 383 In re D.A.J. ...................... 251 Branch Banking & Tr. Co. In re G.B. ....................... 251 v. Simpson .................... 251 In re Gutowski ................... 251 Brock v. Johnson Breeders, Inc. .... 251 In re I.E.H. ...................... 251 Brownstead v. Brownstead ........ 251 In re J.A.K. ...................... 383 Byrd v. Watson ................... 251 In re J.G.R. ...................... 251 In re J.J. ........................ 251 Carter Neighbors Ltd. v. Edwin Rector In re Jerry’s Shell, LLC ............ 383 1995 Charitable Tr. ............. 678 In re K.L. ........................ 678 Charles v. Charles ................ 383 In re L.B.B. ...................... 678 In re N.C. ....................... 521 Denny v. Denny .................. 383 In re N.N.N. ..................... 521 Dominguez v. Francisco Dominguez In re N.R.C. ..................... 678 Masonry, Inc. ................. 383 In re N.T. ....................... 251 In re R.B.L. ...................... 383 E. Town Mkt., L.P. v. 550 In re S.D. ....................... 251 Foods, LLC . 383 In re T.F.L. ...................... 252 Easley v. TLC Cos. ............... 521 In re T.H. ....................... 384 Ellis v. Key City Furn., Inc. ........ 678 In re V.D. ....................... 678 In re Z.D.N.T. .................... 521 Fields v. Fields ................... 521 Jensen v. Jessamy ................ 384 Garrett v. Burris ................. 251 Jordan v. Jordan ................. 384 Greensboro Scuba Sch., LLC v. Robertson .................. 383 Kelly v. Ray of Light Homes, LLC . 252 Kohn v. FirstHealth of Hance v. First Citizens Bank Carolinas, Inc. ................ 252 & Tr. Co. ..................... 251 Hardison v. Goodyear Tire Louis v. Shrum ................... 521 & Rubber Co. ................. 521 Hester v. Hester .................. 383 Marsico v. New Hanover Cnty. Bd. of Educ. ...................... 384 In re A.C. ....................... 383 Moore v. Mohawk Indus., Inc. ...... 521 In re A.E.L. ...................... 383 In re A.W. ....................... 678 Newell v. James E. Rogers, P.A. .... 678 viii CASES REPORTED WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINIONS PAGE PAGE Odom v. Kelly ................... 521 State v. Ross ..................... 522 Overton v. Overton ............... 252 State v. Sellers ................... 522 State v. Sells ..................... 522 Porter v. Bearcat, Inc. ............. 252 State v. Silver .................... 385 Porter v. Bryant .................. 384 State v. Skinner .................. 522 State v. Smyre ................... 385 Quality Built Homes Inc. v. Town State v. Sorrell ................... 253 of Carthage ................... 521 State v. Stanley .................. 522 Richmond v. City of Asheville ...... 252 State v. Stitt ..................... 522 State v. Sullivan .................. 253 Shallotte Partners, LLC v. Berkadia Com. State v. Taylor ................... 253 Mortg., LLC ................... 252 State v. Ward .................... 522 Shoeheel Farms v. City State v. Weeks ................... 385 of Laurinburg ................. 521 State v. Wilkerson ................ 253 Simon v. Moore .................. 252 State v. Young ................... 679 Snoke v. Snoke .................. 252 State v. Alarcon .................. 678 Thompson v. Bank of Am., N.A. .... 523 State v. Armstrong ............... 252 Traber v. Bank of Am. ............. 523 State v. Badson .................. 384 Tyson v. N.C. Dep’t of Transp. ...... 523 State v. Benton .................. 678 State v. Brown ................... 678 Walker v. Holden Temporaries, Inc. ... 385 State v. Collington ................ 252 Ward v. Nucapital Assocs., Inc. ..... 385 State v. Davis .................... 252 Waters v. Peaks .................. 253 State v. Davis .................... 384 Welch v. Willey .................. 385 State v. Ford ..................... 252 Willis v. Willis .................... 385 State v. Fullard .................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Durham Police Department 2011 Annual Report
    Durham Police Department 2011 Annual Report Table of Contents of Contents Table Table of Contents Message from Police Chief Jose L. Lopez Sr. Pages 4-5 Police Department’s Six Performance Measures 1) Overall Part 1 Index Crime Page 6 a. Crime Statistics Page 6 b. Index Crime Breakdown Page 6 c. 10-Year Part 1 Crime Trends Page 6 2) Violent Crime Pages 7-14 a. Violent Crime Statistics Page 7 b. Violent Crime Initiatives/Highlights Page 8 c. Significant 2011 Violent Crime Arrests Pages 9-14 3) Property Crime Pages 15-18 a. Property Crime Statistics Page 15 b. Property Crime Initiatives/Highlights Pages 16-17 c. Significant 2011 Property Crime Arrests Page 18 4) Clearance Rates Page 19 5) Priority 1 Call Responses Page 20 6) Staffing Levels Page 20 Part 2 Crime Statistics Page 21 Juvenile Crime Statistics Page 22 Part 1 Domestic Violence Statistics Page 23 Bull’s Eye – Fourth Year Report Page 24 Traffic Fatalities/Top 10 Accident Locations Page 25 Traffic Safety Initiatives Page 26 Warrant Squad Page 27 Special Operations Division (SOD) Activities Page 28 Operation Medicine Drop Page 28 Federal Task Force Activities Pages 29-30 Firearms Page 31 K-9 Unit Page 32 Durham Police Department 2011 Annual Report 2 Table of Contents Table Table of Contents (Cont) Forensics Page 33 Recruiting Pages 34-35 Other Enforcement Initiatives Page 36 New Equipment – In-Car Cameras/Cab Car Page 37 Facilities Plan Page 38 Crime Prevention Activities Pages 39-44 1) Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) Page 39 2) Mental Health Outreach Program (MHOP) Pages 39-40 3) Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN) Page 41 4) Police Athletic League (PAL) Page 42 5) Other Crime Prevention Activities Page 43 6) National Night Out Page 44 Peace Officers Memorial Service Page 45 Promotions Page 46 Awards Pages 47-48 Employees of the Month Pages 49-52 Above and Beyond Page 53 Durham Police Department 2011 Annual Report 3 Message from the Chief the Chief from Message Message from Durham Police Chief Jose L.
    [Show full text]
  • Fortis SE-S2642ACD.MAG
    STATE OF NORTH CAROL OF THE WAKE COUNTY CAROLINA STATE BA Plaintiff, AMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT, v. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DISCIPLINE MICHAEL B. NIFONG, Attorney, Defendant. The Hearing Committee on its own motion pursuant to Rule of Civil Procedure 60(a) enters the following Amended Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order of Discipline in order to correct a factual mistake in Findings of Fact Paragraph 43 of its original Order in this cause, and to add an additional Conclusion of Law (b): A hearing in this matter was conducted on June 12 through June 16, 2007, before a Hearing Committee composed of F. Lane Williamson, Chair, and members Sharon B. Alexander and R. Mitchel Tyler. Plaintiff, the North Carolina State Bar, was represented by Katherine E. Jean, Douglas J. Brocker, and Carmen K. Hoyme. Defendant, Michael 3. Nifong, was represented by attorneys David B. Freedman and Dudley A. Witt. Based upon the admissions contained in the pleadings and upon the evidence presented at the hearing, this Hearing Committee makes, by clear, cogent and convincing evidence, the following FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Plaintiff, the North Carolina State Bar, is a body duly organized under the laws of North Carolina and is the proper party to bring this proceeding under the authority granted it in Chapter 84 of the General Statutes of North Carolina, and the Rules and Regulations of the North Carolina State Bar (Chapter 1 of Title 27 of the North Carolina Administrative Code). 2. Defendant, Michael B. Nifong, (hereinafter "Nifong"), was admitted to the North Carolina State Bar on August 19, 1978, and is, and was at all times referred to herein, an attorney at law licensed to practice in North Carolina, subject to the laws of the State of North Carolina, the Rules and Regulations of the North Carolina State Bar and the Revised Rules of Professional Conduct.
    [Show full text]
  • An Analysis of the Systemic Problems Regarding Foreign Language Interpretation in the North Carolina Court System and Potential Solutions
    An Analysis of the Systemic Problems Regarding Foreign Language Interpretation in the North Carolina Court System and Potential Solutions Prepared by: Emily Kirby, Sarah Long, and Sonal Raja University of North Carolina School of Law Immigration and Human Rights Policy Clinic Faculty Advisor: Deborah Weissman May 5, 2010 An Analysis of the Systemic Problems Regarding Foreign Language Interpretation in the North Carolina Court System and Potential Solutions Emily Kirby Deborah M. Weissman Sonal Raja Reef C. Ivey II Distinguished Professor of Law Sarah Long Director of Clinical Programs UNC‐CH Law Students http://www.law.unc.edu/documents/clinical programs/foreignlanguageinterpretationproblemsnc.pdf ii Table of Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 1 Policy Recommendations .......................................................................................................................... 5 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 8 PART ONE: An Analysis of the Law Regarding Access to the Courts for Non‐English Speakers .............. 10 I. Federal Law ........................................................................................................................... 10 A. Federal Criminal Case Law ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Published United States Court of Appeals for The
    PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT FOOD LION, INCORPORATED, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CAPITAL CITIES/ABC, INC.; LYNNE LITT, a/k/a Lynne Neufes; ABC HOLDING COMPANY; AMERICAN BROADCASTING COMPANIES, INCORPORATED; RICHARD N. KAPLAN; IRA ROSEN; SUSAN BARNETT, Defendants-Appellants, ADVANCE PUBLICATIONS, INCORPORATED; ASSOCIATED PRESS; THE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN PUBLISHERS; CBS BROADCASTING, INCORPORATED; CABLE NEWS No. 97-2492 NETWORK, INCORPORATED; GANNETT COMPANY, INCORPORATED; THE HEARST CORPORATION; KING WORLD PRODUCTIONS, INCORPORATED; MCCLATCHY NEWSPAPERS, INCORPORATED; THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS; NATIONAL BROADCASTING COMPANY, INCORPORATED; THE NEWSPAPER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA; NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO, INCORPORATED; THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY; THE RADIO-TELEVISION NEWS DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION; THE REPORTERS COMMITTEE FOR FREEDOM OF THE PRESS; INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS; EDITORS, INCORPORATED; NATIONAL GROCERS ASSOCIATION; INTERNATIONAL MASS RETAIL ASSOCIATION; WILLIAM E. LEE; JOHN DEMOTT; ROBERT ELLIS SMITH; MIKE ROSEN; ACCURACY IN MEDIA; MEDIA RESEARCH CENTER; ATLANTIC LEGAL FOUNDATION; SOUTHEASTERN LEGAL FOUNDATION, Amici Curiae. FOOD LION, INCORPORATED, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CAPITAL CITIES/ABC, INC.; LYNNE LITT, a/k/a Lynne Neufes; ABC HOLDING COMPANY; AMERICAN BROADCASTING COMPANIES, INCORPORATED; RICHARD N. KAPLAN; IRA ROSEN; SUSAN BARNETT, No. 97-2564 Defendants-Appellees, ADVANCE PUBLICATIONS, INCORPORATED; ASSOCIATED PRESS; THE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN PUBLISHERS; CBS BROADCASTING, INCORPORATED;
    [Show full text]
  • North Carolina Trial Judges'
    NORTH CAROLINA TRIAL JUDGES’ BENCH BOOK DISTRICT COURT VOLUME 1 FAMILY LAW 2019 Edition Chapter 3 Child Support In cooperation with the School of Government, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill by Cheryl D. Howell and Jan S. Simmons This chapter is one of ten chapters in North Carolina Trial Judges’ Bench Book, ISBN 978-1-56011-957-9. Preparation of this bench book was made possible by funding from the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts, as administered by the School of Government. Copyright © 2019 School of Government, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Chapter 3: Child Support Part 1. Liability and Amount / 1 Part 2. Procedure for Initial Child Support Orders / 109 Part 3. Modification of Child Support Orders / 193 Part 4. Enforcement of Child Support Orders / 241 Checklists Findings for Initial Child Support / 363 Findings for Modification of Support / 365 Findings for Attorney Fees / 365 blank TOC This page intentionally left blank Replacement 9/20/2018 chapter opening 3 TOC Chapter 3: Child Support Part 1. Liability and Amount I. Liability for Child Support . 3 D . Factors That May Justify Deviation . 59 A . Parents Are Primarily Liable for Support . .. 3 E . Procedure Upon Request for Deviation . 61 B . Grandparents Are Not Responsible for Support of a F . Findings Required When Court Allows a Request for Grandchild Except in Limited Circumstances . 5 Deviation . 62 C . Stepparents Are Not Responsible for Support of a G . Findings Required When Court Does Not Deviate or Stepchild Except in Limited Circumstances . 6 Denies a Request for Deviation .
    [Show full text]
  • Suing the Prosecutor Jonathan Van Patten, University of South Dakota School of Law
    University of South Dakota School of Law From the SelectedWorks of Jonathan Van Patten 2010 Suing the Prosecutor Jonathan Van Patten, University of South Dakota School of Law Available at: https://works.bepress.com/jonathan_vanpatten/3/ SUING THE PROSECUTOR JONATHAN K. VAN PATTENt The prosecutor has more control over life, liberty, and reputation than any other person in America. His discretion is tremendous. He can have citizens investigated and, if he is that kind ofperson, he can have this done to the tune of public statements and veiled or unveiled intimations. Or the prosecutor may choose a more subtle course and simply have a citizen's friends interviewed The prosecutor can order arrests, present cases to the grand jury in secret session, and on the basis of his one-sidedpresentation of the facts, can cause the citizen to be indicted and heldfor trial. He may dismiss the case before trial, in which case the defense never has a chance to be heard. Or he may go on with a public trial. If he obtains a conviction, the prosecutor can still make recommendations as to sentence, as to whether the prisoner should get probation or a suspendedsentence, and after he is put away, at whether he is a fit subject for parole. While the prosecutor at his best is one of the most beneficentforces in our society, when he acts from malice or other base motives, 1 he is one of the worst. I. THE PROBLEM The capacity to do great good is accompanied by a corresponding capacity to do great evil.
    [Show full text]
  • In the Supreme Court of the United States
    No. In the Supreme Court of the United States DAVID F. EVANS; COLLIN FINNERTY; READE SELIGMANN, PETITIONERS v. CITY OF DURHAM, NORTH CAROLINA, ET AL. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI DAVID S. RUDOLF KANNON K. SHANMUGAM RUDOLF WIDENHOUSE Counsel of Record & FIALKO CHRISTOPHER N. MANNING 225 East Worthington JAMES M. MCDONALD Avenue #200 LUKE MCCLOUD Charlotte, NC 28203 WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP 725 Twelfth Street, N.W. RICHARD D. EMERY Washington, DC 20005 ILANN M. MAAZEL (202) 434-5000 EMERY CELLI [email protected] BRINCKERHOFF & ABADY LLP 75 Rockefeller Plaza, 20th Floor New York, NY 10019 QUESTION PRESENTED Whether police officers who conspire with a prosecu- tor to fabricate evidence for subsequent use are immune from liability as a matter of law by virtue of the conspir- ing prosecutor’s decision to use the evidence. (I) PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDING Petitioners are David F. Evans; Collin Finnerty; and Reade Seligmann. Respondents are the City of Durham, North Carolina; David Addison; Patrick Baker; Steven W. Chalmers; Beverly Council; Mark Gottlieb; Benjamin Himan; Ronald Hodge; Jeff Lamb; Michael Ripberger; and Lee Russ. (II) TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Opinions below ................................................................................ 1 Jurisdiction ...................................................................................... 1 Statement ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Duke Lacrosse Case and the Blogosphere
    07__JOHNSON__CONTRACT PROOF.DOC 11/18/2008 11:42:21 AM THE DUKE LACROSSE CASE AND THE BLOGOSPHERE KC JOHNSON* I INTRODUCTION On December 28, 2006, Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong filed his initial response to the North Carolina State Bar grievance committee’s complaint that he had unethically withheld exculpatory DNA evidence in the Duke lacrosse case. Nifong concluded his missive with a swipe at the blogosphere: A well-connected and well-financed (but not, I would suggest, well-intentioned) group of individuals—most of whom are neither in nor from North Carolina—have taken it upon themselves to ensure that this case never reaches trial. (And if this seems like paranoid delusion to you, perhaps you should check out websites such as former Duke Law School graduate and current Maryland attorney Jason Trumpbour’s www.friendsofdukeuniversity.blogspot.com/, which has not only called for me to be investigated, removed from this case, and disbarred, but has also provided instructions on how to request such actions and to whom those requests should be sent.)1 A few months earlier, the District Attorney had similarly complained about the blogosphere. Asked in June 2006 by Newsweek reporter Susannah Meadows to comment on the mounting evidence of actual innocence, Nifong replied, “I have seen quite a bit of media speculation (and it is even worse on the blogs) that either starts from a faulty premise or builds to a demonstrably false conclusion. That is not my fault.”2 Nifong was hardly the only prominent figure associated with the case who read the blogs.
    [Show full text]
  • The Duke Rape Case Five Years Later: Lessons for the Academy, the Media, and the Criminal Justice System Dan Subotnik
    The University of Akron IdeaExchange@UAkron Akron Law Review Akron Law Journals June 2015 The Duke Rape Case Five Years Later: Lessons for the Academy, the Media, and the Criminal Justice System Dan Subotnik Please take a moment to share how this work helps you through this survey. Your feedback will be important as we plan further development of our repository. Follow this and additional works at: http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminal Procedure Commons, and the Legal Education Commons Recommended Citation Subotnik, Dan (2012) "The Duke Rape Case Five Years Later: Lessons for the Academy, the Media, and the Criminal Justice System," Akron Law Review: Vol. 45 : Iss. 4 , Article 4. Available at: http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol45/iss4/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Akron Law Journals at IdeaExchange@UAkron, the institutional repository of The nivU ersity of Akron in Akron, Ohio, USA. It has been accepted for inclusion in Akron Law Review by an authorized administrator of IdeaExchange@UAkron. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Subotnik: The Duke Rape Case 10- SUBTONIK_MACRO.DOCM 10/12/2012 3:01 PM THE DUKE RAPE CASE FIVE YEARS LATER: LESSONS FOR THE ACADEMY, THE MEDIA, AND THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Dan Subotnik∗ If engagement is the first step in healing, then the second is pure unadulterated struggle. We will never achieve racial healing if we do not confront one another, take risks. say all the things we are not supposed to say in mixed company.
    [Show full text]
  • Chief Justices State Court Administrators
    Conference of CHIEF JUSTICES Conference of STATE COURT ADMINISTRATORS *:* *:* 1995 *:* 1995 Annual Meeting Monterey, California Conference of Conference of Chief Justices State Court Administrators Allen, Frederic W. Vermont Baldwin, Robert N. Virginia Anderson, E. Riley Tennessee Bauermeister, Mercedes M. Puerto Rico Andr&Garcia, Jose A. Puerto Rico Berson, Steven V. Colorado Baca, Joseph F. New Mexico Buenger, Michael L. South Dakota Benham, Robert Georgia Byers, David K. Arizona Bilandic, Michael A. Illinois Cetrulo, Don Kentucky Brickley, James H. Michigan Chenovick, Patrick A. Montana Brock, David A. New Hampshire Click, Kingsley W. Oregon Calogero, Pascal E, Jr. Louisiana Collins, Hugh M. Louisiana Carrico, Harry L. Virginia Conyers, Howard W. Oklahoma Carson, Wallace P., Jr. Oregon Dosal, Sue K. Minnesota Durham, Barbara Washington Doss, Robert L., Jr. Georgia Feldman, Stanley G. Arizona Drennan, James C. North Carolina Finney, Ernest A., Jr. South Carolina Duncan, Robert L. Wyoming Golden, Michael Wyoming Ferrell, Charles E. Tennessee Grimes, Stephen H. Florida Gilmore, Oliver Alabama Hawkins, Armis E. Mississippi Gingerich, James D. Arkansas Heffernan, Nathan S. Wisconsin Glessner, James T. Maine Hodge, Verne A. Virgin Islands Greenwood, Pamela T. Utah Holmes, Richard W. Kansas Groundland, Lowell L. Delaware Holstein, John C. Missouri Hall, Marilyn K. Michigan Holt, Jack, Jr. Arkansas Hammond, Ulysses B. District of Columbia Hornsby, Sonny Alabama Harrall, Robert C. Rhode Island Johnson, Charles A. 0k 1ah o m a Irwin, John J., Jr. Massachusetts Kaye, Judith S. New York Judice, C. Raymond Texas Keith, A. M. (Sandy) Minnesota Kanter, Deborah New Mexico Kruse, F. Michael American Samoa Kotzan, Bruce A. Indiana Lamorena, Albert0 C., 111 Guam Larkin, Ronald L.
    [Show full text]
  • Fantastic Allegations Defending the Police Supervisors in the Duke Lacrosse Lawsuits Tricia Shields Hedrick Gardner Kincheloe &A
    Fantastic Allegations Defending the Police Supervisors in the Duke Lacrosse Lawsuits Tricia Shields Hedrick Gardner Kincheloe & Garofalo LLP [email protected] Introduction: On March 25, 2006, a story that would soon consume the community and fascinate the nation appeared on the front page of the local newspapers in Raleigh and Durham, North Carolina. Both reported that a young woman – an exotic dancer – had been raped and sodomized by three members of the Duke University lacrosse team, when performing at a party. The dancer was described as the mother of two and a student at North Carolina Central University, a historically African American university in Durham. A neighbor reported that he had seen the woman and another dancer entering the house where the party was held, and when she left a short time later, he heard a man yell at her, "’Thank your grandpa for my cotton shirt.' " Samiha Khanna, Dancer Gives Details of Ordeal, News & Observer, March 25, 2006, at A1. In the following weeks, protests, vigils, and rallies were held on the Duke and NC Central campuses. The lacrosse season was cancelled, and the coach forced to resign. The national media descended onto Durham, where District Attorney Michael Nifong stepped into the limelight, making dozens of inflammatory statements about the case and the players. Nifong subsequently recused himself from the prosecution amidst a State Bar proceeding that resulted in his disbarment, was convicted of criminal contempt for failing to turn over critical evidence in the case, and filed for bankruptcy. Three players were indicted, but were ultimately declared innocent by the North Carolina Attorney General.
    [Show full text]
  • Race to Injustice 00 Seigel Cx2 11/19/08 3:03 PM Page Ii 00 Seigel Cx2 11/19/08 3:03 PM Page Iii
    00 seigel cx2 11/19/08 3:03 PM Page i Race to Injustice 00 seigel cx2 11/19/08 3:03 PM Page ii 00 seigel cx2 11/19/08 3:03 PM Page iii Race to Injustice Lessons Learned from the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case Edited by Michael L. Seigel Carolina Academic Press Durham, North Carolina 00 seigel cx2 11/19/08 3:03 PM Page iv Copyright © 2009 Michael L. Seigel All Rights Reserved Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Race to injustice : lessons learned from the Duke lacrosse rape case / Michael L. Seigel. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-59460-514-7 (alk. paper) 1. Malicious prosecution--North Carolina--Durham--History. 2. Criminal investigation--North Carolina--Durham--History. 3. Rape--North Carolina-- Durham--History. 4. Nifong, Michael Byron. 5. Criminal investigation-- North Carolina--Durham. 6. Discrimination in criminal justice administration--United States. 7. Campus violence--United States. 8. Col- lege students--United States--Alcohol use. I. Seigel, Michael L. II. Title. KFN7977.R33 2008 364.15'32092--dc22 2008043688 Carolina Academic Press 700 Kent Street Durham, North Carolina 27701 Telephone (919) 489-7486 Fax (919) 493-5668 www.cap-press.com Printed in the United States of America 00 seigel cx2 11/19/08 3:03 PM Page v Contents Preface xiii Acknowledgments xix Part One Introduction Chapter One · The Facts and Only the Facts Robert J. Luck & Michael L. Seigel 3 Durham and Duke Before the Storm 3 March 13, 2006, and the Morning After 4 The Investigation and Indictment 9 The Prosecutor and the Press 13 The Response of Duke’s Administration and Faculty 17 About the Truth 22 Epilogue 26 Part Two Lessons Learned about College Campuses Chapter Two · Faculty Reactions, Contentious Debate, and Academic Freedom Robert M.
    [Show full text]