You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Hamilton v. Thomasville Medical Associates, Inc.

Citation: 670 S.E.2d 232Docket: 25P08

Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina; December 10, 2008; North Carolina; State Supreme Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In the case of Caroleen Myers Hamilton, Executor of the Estate of Ronnie C. Hamilton, Sr. v. Thomasville Medical Associates, Inc. and Oscar M. Blackwell, M.D., the Supreme Court of North Carolina addressed a petition for discretionary review filed by the defendants, Thomasville Medical Associates and Dr. Oscar M. Blackwell, regarding a prior decision from the North Carolina Court of Appeals. The petition was submitted on January 22, 2008, under G.S. 7A-31. The Supreme Court, after consideration, denied the petition during a conference held on December 11, 2008, and this order was certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals. The legal representatives involved included Elizabeth Horton for the defendants and Charles O. Peed for the plaintiff, with additional counsel from Richard V. Bennett, Joshua H. Bennett, and Kimberly S. Shipley for the Association of Defense Attorneys. The prior report of the case is noted as N.C.App. 654 S.E.2d 708.

Legal Issues Addressed

Appellate Procedure Reference

Application: The case was previously reported in the North Carolina Court of Appeals, providing a reference point for the Supreme Court's review.

Reasoning: The prior report of the case is noted as N.C.App. 654 S.E.2d 708.

Discretionary Review under G.S. 7A-31

Application: The Supreme Court of North Carolina considered and ultimately denied a petition for discretionary review filed by the defendants.

Reasoning: The Supreme Court, after consideration, denied the petition during a conference held on December 11, 2008, and this order was certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Role of Legal Representation

Application: The defendants and plaintiff were represented by multiple legal counsel, indicating the involvement of experienced attorneys in the appellate process.

Reasoning: The legal representatives involved included Elizabeth Horton for the defendants and Charles O. Peed for the plaintiff, with additional counsel from Richard V. Bennett, Joshua H. Bennett, and Kimberly S. Shipley for the Association of Defense Attorneys.