ALISA G. MITCHELL,
Plaintiff,
v
.
Person County
No. 04 CVS 298
AMELIA HICKS, Individually and
as Agent of POINTER & ASSOCIATES,
INC., POINTER & ASSOCIATES, INC.,
a North Carolina Corporation;
and XRS, Inc., a Georgia Corporation
Defendants.
Alisa G. Mitchell, pro se, for plaintiff-appellant.
Hunton & Williams, LLP, by Steven B. Epstein, for defendant-
appellee XRS, Inc.
Manning Fulton & Skinner, P.A., by William C. Smith, Jr., for
defendant-appellees Amelia Hicks and Pointer & Associates,
Inc.
LEVINSON, Judge.
Plaintiff appeals from orders dismissing her claims against
defendants for failure to state a claim for relief. We conclude
that her appeal should be dismissed.
Plaintiff tendered an offer to purchase a house in Person
County, but the seller of the house accepted a different offer. On
10 May 2004 plaintiff filed suit against defendants, seeking
compensatory and punitive damages for alleged unfair or deceptivetrade practices, conspiracy to commit unfair or deceptive trade
practices, and negligent infliction of emotional distress.
Defendants moved for dismissal under N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 12(b)(6)
(2003). On 13 July 2004 the trial court entered orders dismissing
plaintiff's claims against all defendants under Rule 12(b)(6), for
failure to state a claim for relief. Plaintiff appeals from the
orders of dismissal.
(c)(1) Each assignment of error shall, so far
as practicable, be confined to a single issue
of law; and shall state plainly, concisely and
without argumentation the legal basis upon
which error is assigned.
In the instant case, plaintiff's sole assignment of error states
that she assigns error to [t]he ruling of the trial court in its
Order of Dismissal entered on July 13, 2004. This putative
assignment of error merely reiterates, as stated in the notice of
appeal, that plaintiff is appealing the trial court's dismissal
orders.
We conclude plaintiff violated the North Carolina Rules of
Appellate Procedure by failing to state any legal basis for her
lone assignment of error. See, e.g., Department of Transp. v.Rowe, 353 N.C. 671, 674, 549 S.E.2d 203, 207 (2001) (alleged error
not properly presented to this Court where plaintiff failed to
comply with Rule 10(c) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate
Procedure [which] requires that an appellant state the legal basis
for all assignments of error); Lee v. Mut. Community Sav. Bank,
136 N.C. App. 808, 809 n.1, 525 S.E.2d 854, 856 n.1 (2000)
(plaintiff in violation of Rule 10(c)(1) where the sole assignment
of error stated only that the trial court committed error when it
dismissed [Plaintiffs'] claim . . . under Rule 12(b)(6)).
Violation of the Rules of Appellate Procedure subjects an
appeal to dismissal. N.C.R. App. P. 28. The North Carolina
Supreme Court has held that:
The North Carolina Rules of Appellate
Procedure are mandatory and 'failure to follow
these rules will subject an appeal to
dismissal.' . . .[T]he Rules of Appellate
Procedure must be consistently applied;
otherwise, the Rules become meaningless, and
an appellee is left without notice of the
basis upon which an appellate court might
rule.
Viar v. N.C. Dep't of Transp., 359 N.C. 400, 401-02, 610 S.E.2d
360, 361-62 (2005) (quoting Steingress v. Steingress, 350 N.C. 64,
65, 511 S.E.2d 298, 299 (1999)). We conclude plaintiff's appeal
should be
Dismissed.
Judges McGEE and HUNTER concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***