No. 383A05
(Filed 7 April 2006)
Appeal and Error— appealability — denial of motion to dismiss — forum selection clause
The decision of the Court of Appeals dismissing defendants’ appeal from the trial court’s interlocutory order denying their motion to dismiss is vacated for the reason stated in the dissenting opinion that the denial of a motion to dismiss based on an alleged forum selection clause is immediately appealable, and the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for further remand to the superior court for findings of fact sufficient for appellate review of the jurisdictional issue.
Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 171 N.C. App. 409, 614 S.E.2d 552 (2005), dismissing as interlocutory an appeal from an order denying both a motion for judgment on the pleadings and a motion to dismiss entered 18 February 2004 by Judge J. Gentry Caudill in Superior Court, Mecklenburg County. Heard in the Supreme Court 14 February 2006.
James, McElroy & Diehl, P.A., by Richard B. Fennell and Jared E. Gardner, for plaintiff-appellee.
Vandeventer Black LLP, by David P. Ferrell and Norman W. Shearin, Jr., for defendant-appellants.
*392PER CURIAM.
For the reasons stated in the dissent, the decision of the Court of Appeals is vacated, and the case is remanded with direction to the Court of Appeals to further remand to the Superior Court of Mecklenburg County for findings of fact sufficient for appellate review of the jurisdictional issue.
VACATED AND REMANDED.
Justice MARTIN did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.