{
  "id": 11915013,
  "name": "GEORGE C. KORNEGAY and wife, RETHA B. KORNEGAY, Plaintiffs v. GARY L. BROADRICK and wife, PATRICIA E. BROADRICK, WARLICK, MILSTED, DOTSON & CARTER, a general partnership conducting the practice of law, ALEX WARLICK, JR., CARL STEPHEN MILSTED, MARSHALL F. DOTSON, JR., and JOHN T. CARTER, JR., Individually, MARK PADGETT, and INVESTORS TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants",
  "name_abbreviation": "Kornegay v. Broadrick",
  "decision_date": "1995-06-20",
  "docket_number": "No. 944SC676",
  "first_page": "326",
  "last_page": "328",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "119 N.C. App. 326"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Ct. App.",
    "id": 14983,
    "name": "North Carolina Court of Appeals"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "328 S.E.2d 274",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1985,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "281"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "313 N.C. 230",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        4718465
      ],
      "year": 1985,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "242"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/313/0230-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "363 S.E.2d 206",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1988,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "208"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "88 N.C. App. 387",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8358290
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1988,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "390"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/88/0387-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "407 S.E.2d 269",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1991,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "275"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "103 N.C.App. 697",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8523197
      ],
      "year": 1991,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "706"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/103/0697-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "361 S.E.2d 395",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1987,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "87 N.C. App. 487",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8358583
      ],
      "year": 1987,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/87/0487-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "157 S.E.2d 378",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1967,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "379"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "271 N.C. 702",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8566667
      ],
      "year": 1967,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "704"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/271/0702-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "359 S.E.2d 492",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "494"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "87 N.C. App. 43",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8357832
      ],
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "45"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/87/0043-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 334,
    "char_count": 4811,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.715,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.496042477203441e-08,
      "percentile": 0.39958661682592306
    },
    "sha256": "0eadf2b1e4098f284d0de841368989f316c6343fc54658eac3462039039a3319",
    "simhash": "1:a200acc2b864604e",
    "word_count": 763
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:09:59.579385+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges COZORT and GREENE concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "GEORGE C. KORNEGAY and wife, RETHA B. KORNEGAY, Plaintiffs v. GARY L. BROADRICK and wife, PATRICIA E. BROADRICK, WARLICK, MILSTED, DOTSON & CARTER, a general partnership conducting the practice of law, ALEX WARLICK, JR., CARL STEPHEN MILSTED, MARSHALL F. DOTSON, JR., and JOHN T. CARTER, JR., Individually, MARK PADGETT, and INVESTORS TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "LEWIS, Judge.\nThis appeal arises out of an action brought by plaintiffs to recover damages for breach of a warranty deed executed by defendants Gary and Patricia Broadrick.\nThe facts are not in dispute. The Broadricks conveyed certain real property to plaintiffs by warranty deed. Plaintiffs subsequently discovered that the property was within the right of way of the Intracoastal Waterway owned by the United States Government, a condition recognized as something of an encumbrance. Plaintiffs brought suit in state court against the Broadricks, the closing attorneys, the title company, and the surveyor of the property. The Broadricks counterclaimed for the amount due under the note. The claims against the attorneys and the surveyor were dismissed.\nAnother action was brought in federal court against the United States Government by property owners whose property was affected by the right of way for the Intracoastal Waterway. The present action, still pending in state court, was then \u201cclosed\u201d pending resolution of the federal action. Pursuant to a settlement agreement, the Broadricks paid $5000 to the United States Government, and plaintiffs\u2019 land was cleared of the encumbrance. The settlement was without prejudice to any state court claims the Broadricks and Kornegays had against each other. This action was then \u201creactivated\u201d in state court for resolution of remaining issues. Defendants filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings on its counterclaim. The court granted defendants\u2019 motion and denied plaintiffs\u2019 prayer for attorney\u2019s fees.\nThe sole issue on appeal is whether the trial court, in its order for judgment on the pleadings, erred in denying plaintiffs\u2019 prayer for attorney\u2019s fees paid in clearing the encumbrance. Since plaintiffs have not argued their other assignments of error, these are deemed abandoned. N.C.R. App. P. 28(a) (1995).\nAbsent express statutory or contractual authority or pursuant to certain equitable powers of the court, attorney\u2019s fees are not recoverable. Parker v. Lippard, 87 N.C. App. 43, 45, 359 S.E.2d 492, 494 (citing Bowman v. Comfort Chair Co., 271 N.C. 702, 704, 157 S.E.2d 378, 379 (1967)), modified and aff\u2019d, 87 N.C. App. 487, 361 S.E.2d 395 (1987). This rule includes attorney\u2019s fees sought either as damages or as costs. Powers v. Powers, 103 N.C.App. 697, 706, 407 S.E.2d 269, 275 (1991). Plaintiffs do not contend that the court has equitable power to award attorney\u2019s fees here. Furthermore, plaintiffs point to no contractual or express statutory authority permitting them to recover the attorney\u2019s fees they incurred to clear their title.\nHinkle v. Bowers, 88 N.C. App. 387, 363 S.E.2d 206 (1988), cited by plaintiffs, is not controlling. \u201cLanguage in an opinion not necessary to the decision is obiter dictum and later decisions are not bound thereby.\u201d Trustees of Rowan Technical College v. J. Hyatt Hammond Assocs., Inc., 313 N.C. 230, 242, 328 S.E.2d 274, 281 (1985). There is language in Hinkle suggesting that $150 paid to a plaintiff\u2019s attorney for obtaining a release was recoverable as damages for breach of contract. Hinkle, 88 N.C. App. at 390, 363 S.E.2d at 208. However, in Hinkle, this Court\u2019s holding on the attorney\u2019s fees issue rests on a determination that the defendant\u2019s arguments were not supported by its assignments of error. All other commentary by this Court in Hinkle on the attorney\u2019s fees issue is non-binding dicta.\nWe are bound by the rule set forth in Bowman, Powers, and Parker. Plaintiffs may not recover attorney\u2019s fees as damages or as costs.\nFor the reasons stated, the order for judgment on the pleadings is affirmed.\nAffirmed.\nJudges COZORT and GREENE concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "LEWIS, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "David M. Rouse for plaintiffs-appellanls.",
      "E. C. Thompson, III for defendants-appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "GEORGE C. KORNEGAY and wife, RETHA B. KORNEGAY, Plaintiffs v. GARY L. BROADRICK and wife, PATRICIA E. BROADRICK, WARLICK, MILSTED, DOTSON & CARTER, a general partnership conducting the practice of law, ALEX WARLICK, JR., CARL STEPHEN MILSTED, MARSHALL F. DOTSON, JR., and JOHN T. CARTER, JR., Individually, MARK PADGETT, and INVESTORS TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants\nNo. 944SC676\n(Filed 20 June 1995)\nAttorneys at Law \u00a7 64 (NCI4th)\u2014 attorneys\u2019 fees to clear encumbrance from land \u2014 fees not recoverable\nThe trial court in its order for judgment on the pleadings did not err in denying plaintiffs\u2019 prayer for attorneys\u2019 fees paid in clearing an encumbrance on land sold to plaintiffs by defendants, since, absent express statutory or contractual authority or pursuant to certain equitable powers of the court, attorneys\u2019 fees are not recoverable.\nAm Jur 2d, Attorneys at Law \u00a7\u00a7 237-244.\nAppeal by plaintiffs from judgment entered 4 April 1994 by Judge Ernest B. Fullwood in Onslow County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 2 March 1995.\nDavid M. Rouse for plaintiffs-appellanls.\nE. C. Thompson, III for defendants-appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0326-01",
  "first_page_order": 360,
  "last_page_order": 362
}