Preview:

An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.

NO. COA03-122 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 3 February 2004 JOSEPH M. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. THE ESTATE OF JOHN H. GRIMES SR., SHARON S. GRIMES, EXECUTRIX; JOHN H GRIMES, P.A.; C. BRYAN KOON; LARRY M. CRANE; M. DAVID WIENER; JENNIFER SWANSON; JONATHAN E. KLEIN; ORANGE FAMILY MEDICAL GROUP, P.A.; DURHAM COUNTY HOSPITAL CORPORATION; DUKE UNIVERSITY HEALTH SYSTEM,INC.; DUKE UNIVERSITY AFFILIATED PHYSICIANS, INC.; DURHAM RADIOLOGY ASSOCIATES, P.A.; and PRIVATE DIAGNOSTIC CLINIC, P.L.L.C., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal by plaintiff from order entered 16 May 2002 and order dated 4 June 2002 by Judge Henry W. Hight, Jr. in Superior Court, Durham County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 30 October 2003. Durham County No. 02 CVS 00755

Joseph M. Williams, Jr., plaintiff-appellant, pro se. Patterson, Dilthey, Clay, Bryson & Anderson, L.L.P., by Donna R. Rutala, Christopher J. Derrenbacher, and Heather R. Waddell, for defendants-appellees Jonathan E. Klein and Orange Family Medical Group, P.A. Moore & Van Allen, PLLC, by William E. Freeman, for defendants-appellees The Estate of John H. Grimes, Sr., Sharon S. Grimes, Executrix; John H. Grimes, P.A.; Durham County Hospital Corporation; Duke University Health System, Inc.; Duke University Affiliated Physicians, Inc.; and Private Diagnostic Clinic, P.L.L.C. Newsom, Graham, Hedrick & Kennon, P.A., by Joel M. Craig, for

-2defendants-appellees C. Bryan Koon; Larry M. Crane; M. David Weiner; and Durham Radiology Associates, P.A. Manning, Fulton & Skinner, P.A., by Thomas C. Kilpatrick, for defendant-appellee Jennifer Swanson. McGEE, Judge. Plaintiff filed a complaint on 19 February 2002 against the defendants alleging negligence. Plaintiff committed numerous

procedural errors, including failure to follow proper procedure in the issuance of summons and service of process. filed motions to dismiss. All defendants

The trial court ordered plaintiff's Thereafter, plaintiff filed a

claims be dismissed with prejudice.

motion to alter and amend judgment, as well as a motion requesting findings of fact and conclusions of law. plaintiff's motions. Plaintiff appeals. The trial court denied

Defendants the Estate of John H. Grimes, Sr., Sharon S. Grimes, Executrix; John H. Grimes, P.A.; Durham County Hospital Corporation; Duke University Health System, Inc.; Duke University Affiliated Physicians, Inc.; and the Private Diagnostic Clinic, P.L.L.C., filed a motion to strike portions of the record on appeal pursuant to Rule 37 of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure. identical Jonathan The portion requested to be stricken by this motion is to E. that Klein requested and Orange in a motion filed by defendants P.A. and

Family

Medical

Group,

subsequently allowed by this Court on 4 June 2003.

Therefore, we

allow the present motion to strike portions of the record on appeal in accordance with the previous order of this Court.

-3Defendants Jonathan E. Klein and Orange Family Medical Group, P.A. filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff's appeal on the grounds that (1) plaintiff failed to comply with the trial court's order settling the record on appeal, by including affidavits of service not included in the proposed record and excluding summonses

directed to be included in the record; (2) failing to properly number the pages of the record on appeal, (3) improperly citing to briefs from other appellate cases and attempting to include by reference the arguments from those briefs in his own brief; (4) failing to properly identify plaintiff's assignments of error in the argument of his brief; (5)failing to follow the formatting requirements of Rule 26(g) and Appendix B of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure with regard to line spacing and the inclusion of an affidavit in the brief itself; and (6) failing to cite to any legal authority in support of his argument. Having carefully reviewed the record, we find that plaintiff's numerous violations of the N.C. Rules of Appellate Procedure are egregious. An appellate court may clearly dismiss an appeal for N.C.R.

failure to comply with the Rules of Appellate Procedure.

App. P. 25(b), 34(b)(1); Steingress v. Steingress, 350 N.C. 64, 511 S.E.2d 298 (1999); Bledsoe v. County of Wilkes, 135 N.C. App. 124, 125, 519 S.E.2d 316, 317 (1999)(the Rules of Appellate Procedure "apply to everyone -- whether acting pro se or being represented by all of the five largest law firms in the state. Because plaintiff

violated many of the appellate rules, his appeal must be dismissed, notwithstanding his pro se status."). Thus, in accordance with

-4N.C.R. App. P. 34, this Court dismisses plaintiff's appeal. We have, in addition, reviewed plaintiff's assignments of error and conclude they are without merit. Dismissed. Judges HUDSON and CALABRIA concur. Report per Rule 30(e).



Download 03-122-5.pdf

South Carolina Law