Case Name: PAMELA SHOUSE PACK, Administratrix C.T.A. of the Estate of James F. Shouse v. ALBERTA M. JARVIS, INTEGON CORPORATION, INTEGON LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION, and INTEGON INDEMNITY CORPORATION
Court: North Carolina Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1979-04-17
Citations: 40 N.C. App. 769
Docket Number: No. 7821SC519
Parties: PAMELA SHOUSE PACK, Administratrix C.T.A. of the Estate of James F. Shouse v. ALBERTA M. JARVIS, INTEGON CORPORATION, INTEGON LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION, and INTEGON INDEMNITY CORPORATION
Judges: Judges VAUGHN and Erwin concur.
Reporter: North Carolina Court of Appeals Reports
Volume: 40
Pages: 769–770

Head Matter:
PAMELA SHOUSE PACK, Administratrix C.T.A. of the Estate of James F. Shouse v. ALBERTA M. JARVIS, INTEGON CORPORATION, INTEGON LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION, and INTEGON INDEMNITY CORPORATION
No. 7821SC519
(Filed 17 April 1979)
Appeal and Error § 6.9— order sustaining objections to interrogatories —premature appeal
Purported appeal from an order sustaining defendants’ objections to seventeen interrogatories directed to defendants is dismissed as premature.
APPEAL by plaintiff from Rousseau, Judge. Order entered 9 March 1978 in Superior Court, FORSYTH County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 6 March 1979.
Plaintiff seeks to appeal from an order of the trial court sustaining defendants’ objections to seventeen interrogatories directed to defendants. Defendants moved to dismiss the appeal as being fragmentary and interlocutory. Plaintiff also petitions for writ of certiorari to review the ruling of the trial court.
F. Mickey Andrews for plaintiff appellant.
Womble, Carlyle, Sandridge & Rice, by Allan R. Gitter and William C. Raper, for defendant appellees.

Opinion:
MARTIN (Harry C.), Judge.
Defendants' counsel concede in their brief and oral argument that the trial court expressly stated the order here appealed did not prohibit plaintiff from further proper discovery, without limitation.
The order of Judge Rousseau did not affect a substantial right of the plaintiff. The appeal is interlocutory, fragmentary and premature and should be dismissed. Stanback v. Stanback, 287 N.C. 448, 215 S.E. 2d 30 (1975). The petition for certiorari is denied.
We note that by this process plaintiff has delayed further court proceedings in this case by more than a year.
Petition for certiorari denied. Appeal dismissed.
Judges VAUGHN and Erwin concur.