Case Name: MICHAEL C. PIRO v. REBECCA HADDEN McKEEVER, L.C.S.W.; CYNTHIA L. SAPP, Ph.D.; KAREN BARRY, M.F.T., LMFT; and DAVIDSON COUNSELING ASSOCIATES
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 2016-12-21
Citations: 369 N.C. 291
Docket Number: No. 93A16
Parties: MICHAEL C. PIRO v. REBECCA HADDEN McKEEVER, L.C.S.W.; CYNTHIA L. SAPP, Ph.D.; KAREN BARRY, M.F.T., LMFT; and DAVIDSON COUNSELING ASSOCIATES
Judges: Justice ERVIN did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 369
Pages: 291–291

Head Matter:
MICHAEL C. PIRO v. REBECCA HADDEN McKEEVER, L.C.S.W.; CYNTHIA L. SAPP, Ph.D.; KAREN BARRY, M.F.T., LMFT; and DAVIDSON COUNSELING ASSOCIATES
No. 93A16
Filed 21 December 2016
Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from thé decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals,_N.C. App._, 782 S.E.2d 367 (2016), affirming an order entered on 3 November 2014 by Judge Robert C. Ervin in Superior Court, Mecklenburg County. Heard in the Supreme Court on 11 October 2016.
Wyrick Robbins Yates & Ponton LLP, by Tobias S. Hampson and Michelle D. Connell, for plaintiff-appellant.
Epstein Law Firm, PLLC, by Andrew J. Epstein, for defendant-appellee Rebecca Hadden McKeever, L. C.S. W.
McGuireWoods LLP, by Mark E. Anderson and Monica E. Webb, for National Association of Social Workers, amicus curiae.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
In this case we consider whether plaintiff's complaint sufficiently alleged claims for negligent infliction of emotional distress and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Because the members of the Court are equally divided as to both issues, the holding of the Court of Appeals is left undisturbed and stands affirmed without precedential value. See, e.g., State v. Long, 365 N.C. 5, 705 S.E.2d 735 (2011) (per curiam); State v. Greene, 298 N.C. 268, 258 S.E.2d 71 (1979) (per curiam).
AFFIRMED.
Justice ERVIN did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.