{
  "id": 138419,
  "name": "ALFRED R. GROOMS, Petitioner v. STATE OF N.C. DEPARTMENT OF STATE TREASURER, RETIREMENT SYSTEMS DIVISION, Respondent",
  "name_abbreviation": "Grooms v. State Department of State Treasurer",
  "decision_date": "2001-12-18",
  "docket_number": "No. 401A01",
  "first_page": "562",
  "last_page": "562",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "354 N.C. 562"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "550 S.E.2d 204",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2001,
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "144 N.C. App. 160",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        11433400
      ],
      "year": 2001,
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/144/0160-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 125,
    "char_count": 1348,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.733,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.004951833099149796
    },
    "sha256": "21680d787cee4ad4d32e5cc6bc67eb097144a7b90da42a726d017892410f0441",
    "simhash": "1:088b169e1645c1de",
    "word_count": 211
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:55:42.215284+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "ALFRED R. GROOMS, Petitioner v. STATE OF N.C. DEPARTMENT OF STATE TREASURER, RETIREMENT SYSTEMS DIVISION, Respondent"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PER CURIAM.\nFor the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion by Judge Timmons-Goodson, we reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals.\nREVERSED.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PER CURIAM."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "\u25a0 Kilpatrick Stockton LLP, by James B. Trachtman, for petitioner-appellee.",
      "Roy Cooper, Attorney General, by Robert M. Curran, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent-appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "ALFRED R. GROOMS, Petitioner v. STATE OF N.C. DEPARTMENT OF STATE TREASURER, RETIREMENT SYSTEMS DIVISION, Respondent\nNo. 401A01\n(Filed 18 December 2001)\nPensions and Retirement\u2014 local government employee\u2014death after retirement\u2014survivor\u2019s alternate benefit\nA decision of the Court of Appeals that the beneficiary of a county employee who died within 180 days of retirement was entitled to select the survivor\u2019s alternate benefit set forth in \u00d1.C.G.S. \u00a7 128-27(m) is reversed for the reason stated in the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals that the legislature did not intend for the alternate benefit provided by the statute to apply to the beneficiary of a government employee whose death occurred after his retirement.\nAppeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. \u00a7 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 144 N.C. App. 160, 550 S.E.2d 204 (2001), reversing and remanding an order entered 23 February 2000 by Bullock, J., in Superior Court, Wake County. Heard in the Supreme Court 15 November 2001.\n\u25a0 Kilpatrick Stockton LLP, by James B. Trachtman, for petitioner-appellee.\nRoy Cooper, Attorney General, by Robert M. Curran, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent-appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0562-01",
  "first_page_order": 596,
  "last_page_order": 596
}