State ex rel. Employment Security Commission v. IATSE Local 574

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, Ex Rel. EMPLOYMENT SECURITY COMMISSION v. IATSE LOCAL 574

State ex rel. Emp. Sec. Comm'n v. IATSE Local 574, 442 S.E.2d 339 (N.C. Ct. App. 1994)

Court: Court of Appeals of North Carolina · State Appellate Courts
Decided: May 3, 1994
Docket: No. 9321SC1018
Judges: Wells, Cozort, McCrodden
Citations: 442 S.E.2d 339114 N.C. App. 6621994 N.C. App. LEXIS 432

Cited by 10 1 descriptions by later courts

Syllabus

Appeal and Error § 137 (NCI4th) — action remanded by trial court to determine amount of refund — interlocutory order — order not appealable The order appealed from was interlocutory and not immediately appealable where the trial court ordered that appellee be refunded all unemployment taxes erroneously collected or assessed for a specified period of time, and the court further ordered that the action be remanded to the Employment Security Commission for determination of the amount of refund to which appellee was entitled. Am Jur 2d, Appeal and Error § 125.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion — Wells

WELLS, Judge.

Although not raised by either of the parties, we must first determine whether this case is presently appealable.

In re Watson, 70 N.C. App. 120 , 318 S.E.2d 544 (1984), disc. rev. denied, 313 N.C. 330 , 327 S.E.2d 900 (1985). We conclude that the order appealed from is interlocutory and not immediately appealable.

The judgment of the trial court remanded the case for further hearing before the Commission. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 96-4 (n) provides that in employment security cases “[ejither party may appeal to the appellate division from the judgment of the superior court under the same rules and regulations as are prescribed by law for appeals.” N.C. Gen. Stats. §§ 1-277 and 7A-27, considered together, provide that no appeal lies to an appellate court from an interlocutory judgment unless that ruling deprives the appellant of a substantial right which it would lose if the ruling were not reviewed before *664 final judgment.

Blackwelder v. Dept. of Human Resources, 60 N.C. App. 331 , 299 S.E.2d 777 (1983). A ruling is interlocutory if it does not determine the issues but directs some further proceeding preliminary to a final decree.

Id.

In the present case, the Commission has attempted to appeal from a judgment of the trial court which is not final on its face since the trial court ordered the Commission to determine the refund to which IATSE is entitled. Therefore, the judgment of the trial court is interlocutory.

See Hardin v. Venture Construction Co., 107 N.C. App. 758 , 421 S.E.2d 601 (1992). The issues which the Commission seeks to raise in this appeal may be raised after a final judgment is entered in this case, and the Commission will not be deprived of a substantial right absent immediate appeal.

For these reasons, the appeal of the Employment Security Commission must be dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

Judges COZORT and McCRODDEN concur.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

(dismissing as interlocutory an appeal from superior court order which remanded ESC order to ESC Commission)

Reeves v. Yellow Transp., Inc., 613 S.E.2d 350 (N.C. Ct. App. 2005)

Cited by 10 cases

View all citing references →

State Appellate Courts10

Relies on it most ⓘ

Vest v. Easley549 S.E.2d 568 (N.C. Ct. App. 2001)
Mabrey v. Smith548 S.E.2d 183 (N.C. Ct. App. 2001)
McDonald v. Skeen567 S.E.2d 209 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002)
Stafford v. Stafford515 S.E.2d 43 (N.C. Ct. App. 1999)
Odom v. Clark668 S.E.2d 33 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008)
Murphy v. First Union Capital Markets Corp.567 S.E.2d 189 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002)

Most recent

Odom v. Clark668 S.E.2d 33 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008)
Reeves v. Yellow Transportation, Inc.613 S.E.2d 350 (N.C. Ct. App. 2005)
McDonald v. Skeen567 S.E.2d 209 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002)
Murphy v. First Union Capital Markets Corp.567 S.E.2d 189 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002)
Conseco Finance Servicing Corp. v. Dependable Housing, Inc.564 S.E.2d 241 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002)
Miles v. Martin555 S.E.2d 361 (N.C. Ct. App. 2001)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

Depth	Case	Cited by
	Blackwelder v. State Dep't of Human Res., 299 S.E.2d 777 (N.C. Ct. App. 1983)	88
	In re Watson, 318 S.E.2d 544 (N.C. Ct. App. 1984)	11
	Hardin v. Venture Constr. Co., 421 S.E.2d 601 (N.C. Ct. App. 1992)	6

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list