Case ID: nc_356/html/0422-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ANDREW H. AUSLEY, d/b/a AUSLEY APPRAISAL SERVICES v. BRYAN M. BISHOP
    No. 287A02
    (Filed 22 November 2002)
    Damages and Remedies— two slander claims — one wrongly submitted — punitive damages — new trial not required
    The decision of the Court of Appeals in this case is reversed for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion that, although one of two slander counterclaims by defendant should not have been submitted to the jury in a bifurcated trial under N.C.G.S. § ID-30, the trial court’s instruction with respect to the issue of punitive damages that defendant must prove plaintiff acted with malice which was related to “one or both of the slanders” supports the jury’s award of punitive damages based upon the slander claim that was upheld so that a new trial is not required on all issues relating to such claim.
    Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S.§ 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 150 N.C. App. 56, 564 S.E.2d 252 (2002), affirming in part and vacating in part a judgment entered 14 March 2000 by DeRamus, J.; reversing and remanding an order entered 1 August 2000 by Burke, J.; reversing in part and remanding an order entered 4 August 2000 by DeRamus, J., all in Superior Court, Forsyth County. Heard in the Supreme Court 17 October 2002.
    
      Haywood, Denny & Miller, L.L.P. by John R. Kincaid for plaintiff-appellee.
    
    
      Randolf M. James for defendant-appellant.
    
   PER CURIAM.

The decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion.

REVERSED.

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