Court Opinion

ID: 8901750
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-27 01:11:44.552181+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:07:54.429303
License: Public Domain

STEELMAN, Judge,
concurring in the result.
I concur with the result reached in parts IIIA, IV, V, and VI of the majority opinion. Given the holding in part IIIA of the opinion, the analysis and holdings in part IIIB of the opinion are unnecessary. See O’Neill v. S. Nat’l Bank, 40 N.C. App. 227, 230, 252 S.E.2d 231, 233 (1979) (“An Order denying a Rule 12(b)(6) motion is interlocutory and clearly not appealable.”).