North Carolina State Bar v. DuMont

Decision Date06 November 1979
Docket NumberNo. 58,58
CitationNorth Carolina State Bar v. DuMont, 259 S.E.2d 280, 298 N.C. 564 (N.C. 1979)
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court
PartiesThe NORTH CAROLINA STATE BAR v. Harry DuMONT.

Harold D. Coley, Jr., Raleigh, for plaintiff-appellee.

McLean, Leake, Talman & Stevenson by Wesley F. Talman and Joel B. Stevenson, Asheville, and Adams, Kleemeier, Hagan, Hannah & Fouts by Charles T. Hagan, Jr., and John P. Daniel, Greensboro, for defendant-appellant.

PER CURIAM.

This cause consists of four consolidated disciplinary actions instituted in September 1978 by plaintiff against defendant, a licensed attorney. The conduct complained of allegedly took place in 1972 and 1974. The actions were brought before the disciplinary hearing commission of the North Carolina State Bar, an administrative agency created pursuant to Chapter 582 of the 1975 Session Laws (G.S. 84-28.1).

Defendant moved to dismiss the actions, one of the grounds being that said commission has no jurisdiction over the person of defendant or the subject matter of the actions. The commission denied the motions to dismiss and defendant gave notice of appeal to the Court of Appeals.

Record on appeal was filed in the Court of Appeals on 17 April 1979 and the parties filed briefs. On 2 May 1979 defendant filed a petition pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 that the cause be heard by this court prior to determination by the Court of Appeals. On 5 June 1979 we allowed defendant's petition and issued a writ of certiorari ordering that the record be brought before this court.

Plaintiff contends that the order denying defendant's motions to dismiss is interlocutory and that defendant has no right to appeal from said order. Plaintiff cites G.S. 7A-29 which provides as follows:

Appeals of right from certain administrative agencies. From any Final order or decision of the North Carolina Utilities Commission, the North Carolina Industrial Commission, the North Carolina State Bar pursuant to G.S. 84-28 or an appeal from the Commissioner of Insurance pursuant to G.S. 58-9.4, appeal lies of right directly to the Court of Appeals. (Emphasis added.)

Defendant contends that his appeal is authorized by G.S. 1-277 which provides as follows:

Appeal from superior or district court judge. (a) An appeal may be taken from every judicial order or determination of A judge of a superior or district court, upon or involving a matter of law or legal inference, whether made in or out of session, which affects a substantial right claimed in any action or proceeding; or...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
3 cases
  • North Carolina State Bar v. DuMont
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • January 12, 1982
    ...was interlocutory and the appeal premature and held that the writ of certiorari was improvidently issued. North Carolina State Bar v. DuMont, 298 N.C. 564, 259 S.E.2d 280, 281 (1979). A hearing was held before a committee of the Commission (Committee) during the week of 3 March 1980. Other ......
  • State v. BUCK ISLAND, INC.,
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • June 17, 2003
    ...is true even where an appellant challenges the Commission's exercise of jurisdiction over it. See The North Carolina State Bar v. Du Mont, 298 N.C. 564, 566, 259 S.E.2d 280, 281 (1979) (no appeal of right under G.S. § 7A-29 from interlocutory denial of motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdic......
  • Rent-A-Car Co., Inc. v. Lynch
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • November 6, 1979
    ... ... Mark G. LYNCH, Secretary of Revenue of the State of North Carolina ... Supreme Court of North Carolina ... Nov. 6, 1979 ... ...