Title Insurance v. Smith, Debnam, Hibbert & Pahl, 342 N.C. 887 (1996)

March 8, 1996 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · No. 366A95

342 N.C. 887

TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY OF MINNESOTA v. SMITH, DEBNAM, HIBBERT AND PAHL, a North Carolina General Partnership, and W. THURSTON DEBNAM, JR., FRED J. SMITH, JR., CARL W. HIBBERT, JR., J. LARKIN PAHL, JOHN W. NARRON and BETTIE KELLEY SOUSA, General Partners

No. 366A95

(Filed 8 March 1996)

Appeal by defendants pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 119 N.C. App. 608, 459 S.E.2d 801 (1995), affirming in part and reversing in part the judgment entered by Johnston, J., on 25 February 1994 in Superior Court, Mecklenburg County, and remanding for a new trial on damages. On 5 October 1995, the Supreme Court allowed both plaintiffs and defendants’ petitions for discretionary review of additional issues. Heard in the Supreme Court 12 February 1996.

Perry, Patrick, Farmer & Michaux, P.A., by Roy H. Michaux, Jr., and John H. Carmichael, for plaintiff-appellee and -appellant.

Crews & Klein, P.C., by Paul I. Klein, James P. Crews, and James N. Freeman, Jr., for defendant-appellees and -appellants.

PER CURIAM.

As to the sole issue brought forward on appeal by the dissent in the Court of Appeals, the decision of the court by Judge Lewis is affirmed except that the following sentence in the opinion is disavowed and stricken: “We agree that plaintiff suffered no actual damages until it cancelled the deed of trust, which it did while the jury deliberated.” Title Ins. Co. of Minn. v. Smith, Debnam, Hibbert and Pahl, 119 N.C. App. 608, 611, 459 S.E.2d 801, 804 (1995). As to the additional issues raised in the petitions for discretionary review, discretionary review was improvidently allowed.

AFFIRMED IN PART AND DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IMPROVIDENTLY ALLOWED IN PART.