North Carolina Court of Appeals: Citing Unpublished Opinions Under Rule 30(e)(3)

• An unpublished opinion from North Carolina's Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.
• Citation to such opinions is generally disfavored, but may be permitted under Rule 30(e)(3) of the NC Rules of Appellate Procedure for specific purposes.
• Lawyers should exercise caution when relying on these citations, as they may lead to sanctions or even disbarment.

An unpublished opinion from North Carolina's Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.

A recent case in North Carolina highlights the importance of caution when citing unpublished opinions from the state's Court of Appeals. The case, In re: A.M.K. & A.L.K., involved a citation to an unpublished opinion that may have raised questions about its use as controlling legal authority. While citation is generally disfavored for such opinions, Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure permits it under specific circumstances. However, lawyers should exercise caution when relying on these citations, as they may not be considered authoritative and could potentially lead to sanctions or even disbarment.

The rules governing the citation of unpublished opinions in North Carolina are outlined in Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure. This rule allows for the citation of such opinions, but only under specific circumstances and with certain limitations, such as for establishing claim preclusion, issue preclusion, or the law of the case. The rule is designed to balance the need for legal precedent with the potential risks associated with citing non-authoritative sources. In addition, the use of unpublished opinions as controlling authority can be problematic, particularly in cases where they may not have been thoroughly vetted or reviewed by higher courts.

The implications of this case extend beyond the specific circumstances of the A.M.K. & A.L.K. case. Lawyers and judges must be mindful of the potential risks associated with citing unpublished opinions, including the risk of sanctions or disbarment. Furthermore, the use of such citations can undermine the authority of published opinions and create confusion in the legal community. As a result, it is essential for lawyers to carefully consider the implications of their actions and to exercise caution when relying on unpublished opinions as controlling legal authority.

Lawyers should be cautious when citing unpublished North Carolina Court of Appeals opinions, as they may not constitute controlling legal authority and could potentially lead to sanctions or disbarment.

Source: Original reporting via In re: A.M.K. & A.L.K.