Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The decisions of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals are published in the North Carolina Reports and North Carolina Court of Appeals Reports, respectively. [8] Opinions are first published online on filing day as slip opinions, and may be withdrawn or corrected until the mandate issues 20 days later. [8]
Judicial interpretation is the way in which the judiciary construes the law, particularly constitutional documents, legislation and frequently used vocabulary.This is an important issue in some common law jurisdictions such as the United States, Australia and Canada, because the supreme courts of those nations can overturn laws made by their legislatures via a process called judicial review.
The metadata below describe the original scanning. Follow the "All Files: HTTP" link in the "View the book" box to the left to find XML files that contain more metadata about the original images and the derived formats (OCR results, PDF etc.).
If that individual argued to the court that a motorcycle is not a "motor vehicle", then the court would have to interpret the statute to determine what the legislature meant by "motor vehicle" and whether or not the motorcycle fell within that definition and was covered by the statute. There are numerous rules of statutory interpretation.
The Court of Appeals, along with the Supreme Court, constitute the Appellate Division within North Carolina's unified court system, the General Court of Justice. [5] Its structure is determined by statute. [6] The court comprises 15 members, with one designated as a chief judge by the chief justice of the Supreme Court of North Carolina. [5]
House Bill 607, Various Court Changes: Makes changes affecting the North Carolina court system. Under Section 1a of the bill, dismissed charges and not guilty verdicts shall not be expunged ...
New North Carolina laws go into effect Jan. 1, 2024, affecting elections, porn site age verification, fees for late audits, and more. We’ve got details.
The courts interpreted the law as applying to only those convicted of stealing two or more horses and allowed first-offenders who stole one horse to continue to avail themselves of the lesser penalty. The following year, Parliament explicitly addressed the rule's use with the passage of a new law, solely dedicated to horse thievery.