{
  "id": 9368237,
  "name": "GERALDINE H. STEADMAN, Plaintiff v. THOMAS ALAN STEADMAN, Defendant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Steadman v. Steadman",
  "decision_date": "2002-02-19",
  "docket_number": "No. COA01-376",
  "first_page": "713",
  "last_page": "715",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "148 N.C. App. 713"
    }
  ],
  "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": "421 S.E.2d 170",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1992,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "171",
          "parenthetical": "citation omitted"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "107 N.C. App. 624",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8527877
      ],
      "year": 1992,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "625",
          "parenthetical": "citation omitted"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/107/0624-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "299 S.E.2d 777",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1983,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "780"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "60 N.C. App. 331",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8520808
      ],
      "year": 1983,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "335"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/60/0331-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "511 S.E.2d 27",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1999,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "parenthetical": "citing N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 l-277(a); N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 7A-27"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "132 N.C. App. 229",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        11237423
      ],
      "year": 1999,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "parenthetical": "citing N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 l-277(a); N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 7A-27"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/132/0229-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "460 S.E.2d 332",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1995,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "334",
          "parenthetical": "citation omitted"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "119 N.C. App. 730",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        11917406
      ],
      "year": 1995,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "733",
          "parenthetical": "citation omitted"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/119/0730-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 287,
    "char_count": 4225,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.737,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.3823926019441398e-07,
      "percentile": 0.640802996622583
    },
    "sha256": "f98b30eb340099c88de35c2322657b7bfb357533b478e7b87d396a9c2e651807",
    "simhash": "1:80e84a6c5e6a246e",
    "word_count": 684
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:14:25.013425+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges TIMMONS-GOODSON and BRYANT concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "GERALDINE H. STEADMAN, Plaintiff v. THOMAS ALAN STEADMAN, Defendant"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "SMITH, Judge.\nDefendant appeals from an order of the district court granting partial summary judgment in favor of plaintiff. In the order, the trial court determined that plaintiff was entitled to a money judgment against defendant for arrearages owed to her under the terms of a spousal support agreement. The court then stated:\nThe balance of the issues for the Court to determine on summary judgment concerning the amount of the money judgment to be established in favor of the plaintiff and the amount of attorney fees to be allowed to plaintiff\u2019s attorney is continued for hearing at the February 6, 2001 Session of Halifax County Civil District Court.\nPrior to the trial court\u2019s determination of the amount of money due plaintiff, defendant filed notice of appeal to this Court.\nDefendant has appealed from an interlocutory order. An order is interlocutory \u201cif it is made during the pendency of an action and does not dispose of the case but requires further action by the trial court in order to finally determine the entire controversy.\u201d N.C. Dept. of Transportation v. Page, 119 N.C. App. 730, 733, 460 S.E.2d 332, 334 (1995) (citation omitted). Although interlocutory orders are generally not immediately appealable, a litigant may appeal from an interlocutory order which affects a substantial right. Hart v. F.N. Thompson Constr. Co., 132 N.C. App. 229, 511 S.E.2d 27 (1999) (citing N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 l-277(a); N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 7A-27). A substantial right has been defined as \u201cone which will clearly be lost or irremediably adversely affected if the order is not reviewable before final judgment.\u201d Blackwelder v. Dept. of Human Resources, 60 N.C. App. 331, 335, 299 S.E.2d 777, 780 (1983). It is well settled that a judgment which determines liability but which leaves unresolved the amount of damages is interlocutory and cannot affect a substantial right:\n[ i]f... [such a] partial. .. judgment is in error defendant can preserve its right to complain of the error on appeal from the final judgment by a duly entered exception. Even if defendant is correct on its legal position, the most it will suffer from being denied an immediate appeal is a trial on the issue of damages.\nJohnston v. Royal Indemnity Co., 107 N.C. App. 624, 625, 421 S.E.2d 170, 171 (1992) (citation omitted). Defendant\u2019s appeal in the present case is interlocutory, does not affect a substantial right, and the appeal is therefore dismissed. We remand this case for a determination of the amount of money due plaintiff as a result of defendant\u2019s non-payment of spousal support and such other proceedings as may be appropriate.\nIn addition, we note that this interlocutory appeal is the second premature appeal to this Court by this defendant in the instant case. Accordingly, this Court is constrained to conclude that the appeal was taken for an improper purpose so as to cause unnecessary delay and needless increase in the cost of this litigation. N.C.R. App. R 34(a)(2). Pursuant to Rule 34, the Court imposes the following sanction: the appellant is taxed with the entire costs, to be doubled, with appellant paying one cost and appellant\u2019s counsel paying one cost.\nAppeal dismissed and costs taxed to appellant and appellant\u2019s counsel.\nJudges TIMMONS-GOODSON and BRYANT concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "SMITH, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "William I Skinner, TV, for plaintiff-appellee.",
      "Moseley, Elliott, Sholar, and Dickens, L.L.P., by William F. Dickens, Jr., for defendant-appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "GERALDINE H. STEADMAN, Plaintiff v. THOMAS ALAN STEADMAN, Defendant\nNo. COA01-376\n(Filed 19 February 2002)\nAppeal and Error\u2014 appealability \u2014 interlocutory order \u2014 partial summary judgment \u2014 spousal support agreement\n. Defendant husband\u2019s appeal from the trial court\u2019s grant of partial summary judgment in favor of plaintiff wife regarding arrearages owed to plaintiff under the terms of the parties\u2019 spousal support agreement is dismissed as an appeal from an interlocutory order and defendant is taxed under N.C. R. App. P. 34(a)(2) with the entire costs because this appeal is defendant\u2019s second premature appeal to the Court of Appeals.\nAppeal by defendant from order entered 15 December 2000 by Judge H. Paul McCoy, Jr., in Halifax County District Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 31 January 2002.\nWilliam I Skinner, TV, for plaintiff-appellee.\nMoseley, Elliott, Sholar, and Dickens, L.L.P., by William F. Dickens, Jr., for defendant-appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0713-01",
  "first_page_order": 743,
  "last_page_order": 745
}