Booth v. Utica Mut. Ins. Co.

Decision Date05 April 1983
Docket NumberNo. 659PA82,659PA82
Citation308 N.C. 187,301 S.E.2d 98
PartiesBilly Ray BOOTH v. UTICA MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY.
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court

William M. Speaks, Jr., Winston-Salem, for plaintiff-appellant.

Womble, Carlyle, Sandridge & Rice by William C. Raper and S. Fraley Bost, Winston-Salem, for defendant-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The order of the Court of Appeals dismissing the plaintiff's appeal dealt solely with a procedural issue, i.e., whether the plaintiff properly gave notice of appeal. The Court of Appeals has never considered the substantive issue raised in the plaintiff's brief before that court concerning the granting of the motion of defendant-appellee for summary judgment nor do we. The only issue presented before this Court is the propriety of the Court of Appeals' order dismissing plaintiff-appellant's appeal. The record on appeal clearly shows that the plaintiff-appellant failed to give timely notice of appeal. Failure to give timely notice of appeal in compliance with G.S. 1-279 and Rule 3 of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure is jurisdictional, and an untimely attempt to appeal must be dismissed. Oliver v. Williams, 266 N.C. 601, 146 S.E.2d 648 (1966); Teague v. Teague, 266 N.C. 320, 146 S.E.2d 87 (1966); Walter Corporation v. Gilliam, 260 N.C. 211, 132 S.E.2d 313 (1963); Aycock v. Richardson, 247 N.C. 233, 100 S.E.2d 379 (1957). The plaintiff here neither gave oral notice of appeal in open court nor filed and served written notice of appeal within ten days of the entry of the Judgment. Thus, the Court of Appeals acted correctly in dismissing the purported appeal.

AFFIRMED.

MITCHELL, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

To continue reading

Request your trial
47 cases
  • State v. Campbell
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • 19 Agosto 2005
  • Dogwood Dev. & Mgmt. v. White Oak Transport
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • 7 Marzo 2008
    ...failure to give timely notice of appeal in compliance, with Rule 3 resulted in a lack of jurisdiction); Booth v. Utica Mut. Ins. Co., 308 N.C. 187, 189, 301 S.E.2d 98, 99-100 (1983) (per curia,) ("Failure to give timely notice of appeal in compliance with ... Rule 3 ... is jurisdictional, a......
  • Batlle v. Sabates
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 4 Agosto 2009
    ...timely notice of appeal ... is jurisdictional, and an untimely attempt to appeal must be dismissed." Booth v. Utica Mutual Ins. Co., 308 N.C. 187, 189, 301 S.E.2d 98, 99-100 (1983). [I]f a timely motion is made by any party for relief under Rules 50(b), 52(b) or 59 of the Rules of Civil Pro......
  • Henlajon, Inc. v. Branch Highways, Inc., COA01-445.
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 19 Marzo 2002
    ...Crowell Constructors, Inc. v. State ex rel. Cobey, 328 N.C. 563, 402 S.E.2d 407, 408 (1991) (citing Booth v. Utica Mutual Ins. Co., 308 N.C. 187, 301 S.E.2d 98 (1983)). Defendant contends that plaintiff's failure to serve the notice of appeal "at or before the time of filing" mandates dismi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT