N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1

Failure to state findings of fact and conclusions of law separately under Rule 52(a)(1) does not require reversal when it causes no prejudice and permits meaningful appellate review.

Brooks v. Butler · filed 1984-10-16Rule 52(a)(1)

We do not believe, however, that petitioner was prejudiced by the trial court’s failure to state separately its findings of fact and conclusions of law as required by G.S. 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1). As stated, the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, although not readily distinguishable, were sufficient to permit meaningful appellate review.

When a judge tries a case without a jury, Rule 52(a) requires findings on every issue raised by the pleadings and conclusions of law based on those findings.

Gilbert Engineering Co. v. City of Asheville · filed 1985-05-07Rule 52(a)

In cases where the trial judge sits as the trier of facts, he is required to (1) find the facts on all issues joined in the pleadings; (2) declare the conclusions of law arising on the facts found; and (3) enter judgment accordingly. ... Specifically, then, the trial court was required to determine whether such a warranty existed (in view of City’s assertion that the contract disclaimed warranties), and, if so, whether it had been breached by City. The court’s findings and conclusions do not address these issues.

Rule 52 requires the trial judge to make specific findings of fact and separate conclusions of law when determining an alimony award.

Gebb v. Gebb · filed 1985-10-15Rule 52

In determining the amount of alimony to be awarded the trial judge must comply with G.S. 1A-1, Rule 52, i.e., find facts specially, state separately the conclusions of law resulting from the facts so found, and direct entry of appropriate judgment.

Rule 52(a)(2) requires a trial court to make findings of fact when deciding a motion only if a party requests them.

Smith v. Mariner · filed 1985-10-29Rule 52(a)(2)

A trial court, however, is required to make findings of fact in deciding a motion only when requested by a party. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(2) of the Rules of Civil Procedure. We can find no such request in this record.

Rule 52 does not require findings of fact on a motion unless a party requests them.

Donavant v. Hudspeth · filed 1986-08-29(a)(2)

The record does not reflect a request by either party that the trial judge make findings of fact; therefore, he was not required to set out his findings on the preliminary questions necessary to determination of the admissibility of the evidence. N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 52.

Rule 52(a) requires a trial court deciding alimony without a jury to make specific findings of fact and state its conclusions of law separately.

Perkins v. Perkins · filed 1987-05-19Rule 52(a)

Because an alimony award is determined by a trial court without a jury, N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a) requires the trial court to find facts specifically and state conclusions of law separately.

Rule 52(b) does not require amended findings when the existing findings sufficiently support the judgment.

Branch Branking & Trust Co. v. Home Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n of Eastern North Carolina · filed 1987-04-07Rule 52(b)

These findings are sufficient to support the trial court’s judgment that the merger doctrine does not apply; therefore, the trial court properly denied defendant’s Rule 52(b) motion.

Rule 52(a)(2) requires findings of fact and conclusions of law on a motion to set aside a verdict and grant a new trial only when a party requests them.

Campbell v. Pitt County Memorial Hospital, Inc. · filed 1987-12-02Rule 52(a)(2)

The record here reveals no request by plaintiff-child for findings of fact and conclusions of law supporting the trial court’s grant of defendant’s motion to set aside the verdict and award a new trial on plaintiff-child’s damages. Findings and conclusions on such motions, while always helpful to an appellate court, are necessary only when requested by a party.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a judge hearing a case without a jury to make findings on the ultimate facts needed to support the conclusions of law; evidentiary facts need not be recited.

Curd v. Winecoff · filed 1988-02-16Rule 52(a)(1)

Rule 52(a)(1) does not require recitation of evidentiary facts, but it does require specific findings on the ultimate facts established by the evidence, admissions and stipulations which are determinative of the questions involved in the action and essential to support the conclusions of law reached.

Rule 52(a) requires specific findings on facts essential to the trial court’s conclusions of law.

Joyner v. Adams · filed 1987-11-17Rule 52(a)

G.S. 1A-1, Rule 52(a) requires the trial court to make specific findings on all facts established by the evidence and essential to support the conclusions of law reached.

A trial court need not state reasons or make findings when ruling on a new trial motion unless a party specifically requests findings under Rule 52(a)(2).

Strickland v. Jacobs · filed 1988-01-05Rule 52(a)(2)

In ruling on a motion for a new trial under Rule 59(a), absent a specific request made pursuant to Rule 52(a)(2), a trial court is not required to either state the reasons for its decision or make findings of fact showing those reasons.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires findings, conclusions of law, and a judgment in an action tried without a jury; an order missing the judgment is remanded for entry of a proper judgment.

Pitts v. Broyhill · filed 1988-02-16Rule 52(a)(1)

“In all actions tried upon the facts without a jury . . . the court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment.” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (emphasis added). The order in this action contained the first two elements of a proper order, but was defective because it did not contain the last. The remedy to correct this deficiency, however, is not a new trial, but rather a remand for entry of a proper judgment.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a judge sitting without a jury to find specific ultimate facts, rather than merely recite evidence, so an appellate court can review the judgment.

Appalachian Poster Advertising Co. v. Harrington · filed 1988-04-05(a)(1)

The findings of fact required under G.S. 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) must be more than evidentiary facts; they must be specific ultimate facts sufficient enough for an appellate court to determine if the judgment is supported by the evidence.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a trial court’s findings of fact to be distinguishable from its conclusions of law.

Mitchell v. Lowery · filed 1988-05-17Rule 52(a)(1)

Moreover, Rule 52(a)(1) requires only that the trial court’s findings of fact be distinguishable from its conclusions of law.

Rule 52(a) does not permit findings to rest on evidence from a separate hearing that was not before the court when it heard the matter and that the affected party had no opportunity to rebut.

Hollerbach v. Hollerbach · filed 1988-05-31Rule 52(a)

The trial court erred in considering evidence presented at the 3 February 1987 hearing because this evidence was not before it on 23 January 1987, and petitioner had no opportunity to rebut the evidence or present additional evidence.

Rule 52(a)(2) permits a ruling without written findings of fact or conclusions of law when no party requests them; the court is then presumed to have found facts supporting its order.

Lea Co. v. North Carolina Board of Transportation · filed 1989-01-04Rule 52(a)(2)

Judge Ross did not make written findings of fact or conclusions of law relating to the services of paralegals and secretaries acting as paralegals, and no party requested that he do so. N.C.R. Civ. P. 52(a)(2). Therefore, it is presumed that the court on proper evidence found facts to support its order.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires separate findings of fact and conclusions of law in an action tried without a jury.

State v. White · filed 1989-05-16Rule 52(a)(1)

In all actions tried upon the facts without a jury or with an advisory jury, the court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment. ... The evidence clearly supports the findings, and the findings support the conclusions and the order signed.

Rule 52 requires a superior court hearing a local employee’s action on the State Personnel Commission record to make findings of fact, draw conclusions of law, and enter judgment.

Mitchell v. Thornton · filed 1989-06-20Rule 52

The judge of the superior court must make findings of fact, draw conclusions of law therefrom and enter the judgment as provided in G.S. 1A-1, Rule 52.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a trial court sitting without a jury to make findings of fact distinguishable from its conclusions of law.

In re the Estate of Francis · filed 1989-08-01Rule 52(a)(1)

G.S. 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) does require a trial court sitting without a jury to “find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon.” In this case, the trial court adopted the clerk’s very specific findings of fact and made the conclusions set forth above in a single paragraph. “Rule 52(a)(1) requires only that the trial court’s findings of fact be distinguishable from its conclusions of law.”

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a judge sitting without a jury to make specific findings of fact and separate conclusions of law.

Blalock Electric Co. v. Grassy Creek Development Corp. · filed 1990-07-17Rule 52(a)(1)

Where the trial court sits without a jury, the judge is required to “find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment.” G.S. 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1).

Rules 41(b) and 52(a)(1) require findings of fact and conclusions of law when the court dismisses a plaintiff’s claim on the merits in a nonjury trial; failure to make them is grounds for a new trial.

Kirby Building Systems, Inc. v. McNiel · filed 1990-07-26Rule 41(b); Rule 52(a)(1)

The requirement to make findings of fact and conclusions of law is mandatory, and a failure to do so is grounds for granting a new trial.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires sufficiently specific findings of fact in a nonjury trial to permit appellate review of the judgment.

Provident Finance Co. of North Carolina, Inc. v. Rowe · filed 1991-01-15Rule 52(a)(1)

Rule 52(a)(1) requires the trial court to make a “specific statement of the facts on which the rights of the parties are to be determined, and those findings must be sufficiently specific to enable an appellate court to review the decision and test the correctness. of the judgment.” Quick v. Quick, 305 N.C. 446, 451, 290 S.E.2d 653, 657 (1982).

Rule 52(a) requires a trial court sitting as trier of fact to find facts specially, state conclusions of law separately, and direct entry of the appropriate judgment.

Koufman v. Koufman · filed 1991-10-03(a)

N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a) provides that when a trial court sits as trier of fact, it must “find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment.”

Rule 52 requires a judge in a trial without a jury to resolve all issues raised by the pleadings and evidence through findings of fact and conclusions of law supporting a final judgment.

Small v. Small · filed 1992-09-15

In a trial without a jury, it is the duty of the trial judge to resolve all issues raised by the pleadings and the evidence by making findings of fact and drawing therefrom conclusions of law upon which to base a final order or judgment.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a court trying a case without a jury to find facts, state its conclusions of law separately, and enter judgment accordingly.

Statesville Stained Glass, Inc. v. TE Lane Construction & Supply Co., Inc. · filed 1993-06-15Rule 52(a)(1)

In an action tried without a jury, the court is required to find facts, state separately its conclusions of law, and enter judgment accordingly. N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (1990).

Rule 52(a)(2) does not require findings of fact on a Rule 60(b) motion unless a party requests them.

Nations v. Nations · filed 1993-07-20Rule 52(a)(2)

Although it would be the better practice to do so when ruling on a Rule 60(b) motion, the trial court is not required to make findings of fact unless requested to do so by a party.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires conclusions of law to be based on the facts found by the court and supported by grounds; a bare conclusion does not comply.

In re the Foreclosure of the Deed of Trust of Newcomb · filed 1993-09-21(a)(1)

However, the conclusions of law “must be based on the facts found by the court. A bare conclusion unaccompanied by the supporting grounds for that conclusion does not comply with G.S. 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1).”

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a court trying facts without a jury to make specific findings of fact and separately state its conclusions of law.

Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools System v. Chavioux · filed 1994-08-16Rule 52(a)(1)

Rule 52 of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure requires that in all actions tried upon the facts without a jury, “the court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment.” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a) (1990). A bare conclusion such as the one in this case does not meet the requirements of Rule 52(a)(1).

Rule 52(a)(1) requires specific findings on ultimate facts established by the evidence that determine the issues and support the conclusions of law.

Wiggins v. Triesler Co. · filed 1994-06-21(a)(1)

Rule 52(a)(1) does not require a recitation of all evidentiary facts, but it does require specific findings on the ultimate facts established by the evidence, which are determinative of the issues involved in the action and essential to support the conclusions of law reached.

Rule 52(a)(2) permits a court to make findings of fact and conclusions of law when ruling on preliminary motions, and requires entered conclusions of law to be supported by adequate findings.

Epps v. Duke University, Inc. · filed 1994-09-06(a)(2)

A court is not required to make findings of fact and conclusions of law when ruling on preliminary motions, but it has the discretion to do so. See N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(2) (1990); Watkins v. Hellings, 321 N.C. 78, 361 S.E.2d 568 (1987). If a court does enter conclusions of law, they must be supported by adequate findings. See Appalachian Poster Advertising Co. v. Harrington, 89 N.C. App. 476, 366 S.E.2d 705 (1988).

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a trial court in a non-jury trial to make findings on the ultimate facts needed to support its conclusions, but not to recite every evidentiary fact.

Tedder v. Hodges · filed 1995-06-06Rule 52(a)(1)

G.S. 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) provides that in a non-jury trial, the trial court must “find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment.” “However, the trial court need not recite every evidentiary fact presented at the hearing, but must only make specific findings on the ultimate facts established by the evidence that are determinative of the questions raised in the action and essential to support its conclusions.”

Rule 52(a)(1) requires an appropriate judgment in an action tried without a jury; an order lacking one must be remanded for entry of a proper judgment.

Brower v. Killens · filed 1996-06-18Rule 52(a)(1)

Accordingly, under Pitts, we remand this case to the trial court for entry of an order consistent with this opinion which satisfies the strictures of N.C.R. Civ. P. 52(a)(1).

In a nonjury trial, Rule 52(a)(1) requires the court to make specific findings of fact, state its conclusions of law separately, and direct judgment accordingly.

Chicago Title Insurance v. Wetherington · filed 1997-10-07Rule 52(a)(1)

In all actions tried without a jury, the trial court is required to make specific findings of fact, state separately its conclusions of law, and then direct judgment in accordance therewith.

Rule 52 requires a trial court after a bench trial to make findings of fact and separate conclusions of law that explain its decision.

In Re Everette · filed 1999-04-20Rule 52

At the close of all the evidence in a bench trial, the trial court must make findings of fact and state separate conclusions of law in order to assist us in understanding the basis for the trial court’s decision.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a nonjury trial court to find the ultimate facts on all pleaded issues, state separate legal conclusions, and enter judgment, without requiring every evidentiary fact.

Mann Contractors, Inc. v. Flair With Goldsmith Consultants-II, Inc. · filed 1999-12-07(a)(1)

As such, the judge is required to find the facts on all issues raised by the pleadings, state separately its conclusions of law drawn from the facts found, and enter its judgment. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1); Coggins v. City of Asheville, 278 N.C. 428, 180 S.E.2d 149 (1971). Rule 52(a)(1) does not require the trial court to recite all of the evidentiary facts; it is required only to find the ultimate facts, i.e., those specific material facts which are determinative of the questions involved in the action and from which an appellate court can determine whether the findings are supported by the evidence and, in turn, support the conclusions of law reached by the trial court.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires the court in actions tried without a jury or with an advisory jury to make specific factual findings, separately state its legal conclusions, and direct entry of the appropriate judgment.

Williamson v. Williamson · filed 2000-10-17(a)(1)

N.C.Gen.Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (1990), governing actions for permanent alimony, provides: "In all actions tried upon the facts without a jury or with an advisory jury, the court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment." Pursuant to Rule 52(a), the trial court's findings of fact must be more than mere evidentiary facts; they must be the "specific ultimate facts ... sufficient for [an] appellate court to determine that the judgment is adequately supported by competent evidence."

A trial court granting summary judgment need not make findings of fact or conclusions of law.

Bratton v. Oliver · filed 2000-12-19Rule 56(c)

The trial court was not required to, and did not, make findings of fact or conclusions of law in granting Seibels Bruce’s summary judgment motion.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a trial court in a bench trial to make specific factual findings and state its conclusions of law separately.

Lagies v. Myers · filed 2001-02-20(a)(1)

In a bench trial, the trial court is required to “find the facts specifically and state separately its conclusions of law.” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (1999).

Rule 52 requires the trial judge to make findings of fact that determine the issues raised by the pleadings and evidence.

Goodson v. Goodson · filed 2001-08-07

Furthermore, it is the duty of the trial judge to make findings of fact determinative of the issues raised by the pleadings and the evidence. See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52 (1999); In re Whisnant, 71 N.C. App. 439, 441, 322 S.E.2d 434, 435 (1984).

Rule 52(a) requires brief, definite, pertinent findings and conclusions on contested matters, with essential facts sufficient to support the decision.

State v. Robinson · filed 2001-08-21Rule 52(a)

The findings of fact by the trial court in the case before us are sufficient and support its conclusion that "the petition of the surety to remit the $40,000.00 bond be denied in full."

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a judge conducting a nonjury trial to make findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Hilliard v. Hilliard · filed 2001-11-06(a)(1)

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure requires a trial judge hearing a case without a jury to make findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a judge in a nonjury trial to make findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Washington v. Mitchell · filed 2001-11-06(a)(1)

In a trial without a jury, the judge is required to make findings of fact and conclusions of law. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (1999).

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a court in a nonjury or advisory jury trial to make special factual findings, state separate legal conclusions, and direct entry of the appropriate judgment.

Schmeltzle v. Schmeltzle · filed 2001-11-06(a)(1)

North Carolina General Statute Section 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) governs findings by the trial court and applies to permanent alimony.

In nonjury actions, the court must make specific factual findings, state its legal conclusions separately, and direct entry of the appropriate judgment.

In Re Anderson · filed 2002-06-18Rule 52(a)(1)

In all actions tried upon the facts without a jury or with an advisory jury, the court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (2001). Rule 52(a) requires three separate and distinct acts by the trial court: (1) find the facts specially; (2) state separately the conclusions of law resulting from the facts so found; and (3) direct the entry of the appropriate judgment.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a judge in a nonjury action to make separate findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Pineda-Lopez v. North Carolina Growers Ass'n · filed 2002-07-16(a)(1)

Thus, this rule requires the trial judge hearing a case without a jury to make findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a court trying facts without a jury to make specific findings of fact and state separate conclusions of law.

RPR & Associates, Inc. v. University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill · filed 2002-10-15(a)(1)

“In all actions tried upon the facts without a jury . . . the court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon . . . .” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (2001). ... Such specific findings are necessary for appropriate appellate review. ... Although the trial court found that, “[a]s a result of the unreasonable and excessive punchlist process, RPR was required to expend an extraordinary sum of money for punchlist work above and beyond that reasonably anticipated and included in RPR’s bid” and awarded costs related to subcontractor expenses, the trial court made no findings in connection with the direct costs expended by plaintiff. As a result, we are unable to determine whether or not the trial court properly considered the evidence of plaintiff’s direct costs. We therefore remand the case for additional findings of fact regarding this evidence.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires courts in nonjury or advisory-jury trials to make special factual findings, state legal conclusions separately, and direct entry of the appropriate judgment.

Department of Transportation v. Byerly · filed 2002-12-03(a)(1)

N.C. Gen.Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (2001) provides "in all actions tried upon the facts without a jury or with an advisory jury, the court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment."

Rule 52 requires a trial court that must make findings of fact to make those findings specially.

In Re Harton · filed 2003-03-18Rule 52

When a trial court is required to make findings of fact, it must make the findings of fact specially. See In re Anderson, 151 N.C. App. 94, 96, 564 S.E.2d 599, 601 (2002); see also N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 52 (2001) (“findings by the court”).

Rule 52(a)(1) requires findings of fact and conclusions of law in a nonjury trial, but additional findings are unnecessary when the facts are undisputed and the record permits review.

Cumberland Homes, Inc. v. Carolina Lakes Property Owners' Ass'n · filed 2003-06-17Rule 52(a)(1)

“In all actions tried upon the facts without a jury . . . the [trial] court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment.” N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (2001); ... According to the parties in the instant case, the evidentiary facts are not in dispute. Therefore, because additional findings of fact are not required and because the record provides a sufficient basis for our review on the merits, we can properly determine whether the trial court erred in construing the restrictive covenant.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a trial court in a bench trial to state specific factual findings separately from its conclusions of law; the findings must support the conclusions.

Jones v. Jones · filed 2004-01-06Rule 52(a)(1)

In a bench trial, the trial court must "find the facts specifically and state separately its conclusions of law." N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (1999). ... The facts found are not sufficient to support this conclusion, and as a matter of law, can only support a conclusion that the dissolution agreement neither modified the previous separation agreement nor waived Mrs. Jones' right to alimony.

Rule 52(a)(2) does not require findings of fact and conclusions of law on a motion unless a party requests them or Rule 41(b) provides otherwise.

Cunningham v. Sams · filed 2003-11-18Rule 52(a)(2)

Pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(2) (2001), “findings of fact and conclusions of law are necessary on decisions of any motion... only when requested by a party and as provided by Rule 41(b).” ... Accordingly, we hold that the trial court was not required to make findings of fact in this matter.

Rule 52(a)(2) does not require findings of fact or conclusions of law on a motion when neither party requests them, unless Rule 41(b) provides otherwise.

Lawing v. Sams · filed 2003-11-18Rule 52(a)(2)

Under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(2) (2001), “findings of fact and conclusions of law are necessary on decisions of any motion . . . only when requested by a party and as provided by Rule 41(b).” ... Our review of the transcript indicates neither party requested the trial court render findings of fact or conclusions of law. Accordingly, we find this argument to be without merit.

Rule 52(b) allows amended or additional findings to clarify the trial court’s factual determinations or decision for appellate review.

Department of Transportation v. Elm Land Co. · filed 2004-03-16Rule 52(b)

The primary purpose of an amendment under Rule 52(b) is to give the appellate court a correct understanding of the factual issues determined by the trial court or a clearer understanding of the trial court’s decision.

Rule 52(a)(2) requires a judge to make findings on a motion only when a party requests them.

Elliott v. Estate of Elliott · filed 2004-04-06Rule 52(a)(2)

Since Rule 52(a)(2) clearly requires the judge to make findings only following a request from a party, and the record does not reveal any such request, we overrule plaintiff’s first assignment of error.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires sufficient findings of fact to support a trial court’s conclusions of law and permit appellate review.

Woodring v. Woodring · filed 2004-06-01Rule 52(a)(1)

In the instant case, because the order appealed from does not contain findings of fact sufficient to support the trial court’s conclusion of law, we reverse and remand the trial court’s order.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a judge deciding facts without a jury to make specific findings of ultimate fact based on the evidence and to state conclusions of law separately.

In Re O.W. · filed 2004-06-01Rule 52(a)(1)

In all actions tried upon the facts without a jury . . . the court shall find the facts specifically and state separately its conclusions of law thereon . . . .” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (2003). Thus, the trial court must, through “processes of logical reasoning,” based on the evidentiary facts before it, “find the ultimate facts essential to support the conclusions of law.”

Rule 52(a)(1) requires specific findings of fact and separate conclusions of law in nonjury trials; findings that clearly show the factual basis of the decision satisfy the rule.

IN MATTER OF ALK · filed 2004-07-06Rule 52(a)(1)

In all actions tried upon the facts and without a jury, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (2003) requires that the trial court "find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment." ... Thus, we conclude that the trial court's order satisfies the requirements of Rule 52(a) and Anderson.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a trial court to make specific findings of ultimate fact that support its conclusions of law and permit appellate review.

In re J.S. · filed 2004-07-20Rule 52(a)(1)

Thus, the trial court must, through “processes of logical reasoning,” based on the evidentiary facts before it, “find the ultimate facts essential to support the conclusions of law.”

Findings made on a Rule 52(a)(2) motion need only be detailed enough for meaningful appellate review.

House v. Stone · filed 2004-04-06Rule 52(a)(2)

Findings of fact made pursuant to a Rule 52(a)(2) motion need only be sufficiently detailed to allow for meaningful appellate review.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires the trial court to make its own findings of fact rather than broadly incorporating outside reports as its findings.

In Re JS · filed 2004-07-20(a)(1)

Consequently, the trial court should not broadly incorporate these written reports from outside sources as its findings of fact.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a court trying facts without a jury to make special factual findings, separately state its legal conclusions, and direct the appropriate judgment.

In the Matter of Rp · filed 2004-12-21Rule 52(a)(1)

Moreover, "[i]n all actions tried upon the facts without a jury . . ., the court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment." N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (2003).

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a court in a nonjury action to specially find the facts, separately state its conclusions of law, and direct entry of the appropriate judgment.

IN RE HD · filed 2004-12-21(a)(1)

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (2001). Rule 52(a) requires three separate and distinct acts by the trial court: (1) find the facts specially; (2) state separately the conclusions of law resulting from the facts so found; and (3) direct the entry of the appropriate judgment.

In a bench trial, Rule 52(a)(1) requires the court to make specific factual findings, state separate legal conclusions, and enter the appropriate judgment.

MEHRIZI v. ROMERO-BAEZA · filed 2004-12-21(a)(1)

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52 (a)(1)(2003) states, " [i]n all actions tried upon the facts without a jury or with an advisory jury, the court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct entry of the appropriate judgment. " ... Here, plaintiff suggests the following statement from the court's judgment complies with the dictates of Rule 52(a)(1): "[a]nd it appearing to the Court that the landlord did provide a safe and habitable premises, but that Defendant failed to pay rent in a timely manner and damaged the premises as shown through the testimony of the parties and the various documentary exhibits admitted into evidence." We cannot agree; this judgment fails to comply with Rule 52(a)(1) and in fact reads more like a brief synopsis of what happened at trial.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a court in a bench trial to make special factual findings, separately state its legal conclusions, and direct entry of the proper judgment.

LaFell v. LaFell · filed 2005-01-18(a)(1)

The North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure mandate that "[i]n all actions tried upon the facts without a jury . . . , the court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment." N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (2003).

Rule 52(a)(1) does not require findings on petitions for attorneys’ fees filed after the action has been resolved by consent order.

Carswell v. Hendersonville Country Club, Inc. · filed 2005-03-15Rule 52(a)(1)

Here, the parties filed petitions for attorneys’ fees and sought an order of the court; plaintiff’s action had already been addressed in the consent order. Therefore, Rule 52(a)(1) does not apply to the court’s order denying the petitions for an award of attorneys’ fees.

Rule 52(a)(2) does not require a trial court to make specific findings of fact when ruling on a motion unless a party requests them.

Currituck Associates-Residential Partnership v. Hollowell · filed 2005-05-17Rule 52(a)(2)

Under Rule 52(a)(2) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure, however, a trial court is not required to make specific findings of fact when ruling upon a motion unless such findings are requested by a party.

Rule 52(a)(1) permits a court to summarize testimony if it also makes its own ultimate findings and resolves material disputes.

In Re CLC · filed 2005-07-19Rule 52(a)(1)

There is nothing impermissible about describing testimony, so long as the court ultimately makes its own findings, resolving any material disputes.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a court trying facts without a jury to state separate conclusions of law sufficient to support its judgment.

IN THE MATTER OF LC · filed 2005-12-06Rule 52(a)(1)

"In all actions tried upon the facts without a jury or with an advisory jury, the court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment." ... However, the order appealed from does not contain sufficient conclusions of law to support its adjudicatory provisions.

Rule 52(a)(2) does not require a trial court to make findings of fact on a personal jurisdiction motion unless a party requests them.

A.R. Haire, Inc. v. St. Denis · filed 2006-02-21Rule 52(a)(2)

However, absent a request by the parties, which does not appear in the record, the trial court is not required to find the facts upon which its ruling is based. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(2) (2005).

Rule 52(a)(2) requires requested findings of fact and conclusions of law on a motion concerning service and personal jurisdiction; failure to make them requires vacatur and remand.

Agbemavor v. Keteku · filed 2006-05-16Rule 52(a)(2)

When the trial court failed to make the required findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding the service of process and jurisdiction over defendant, the trial court’s judgment must be vacated. Based on the inconsistent facts before us, and the lack of findings of fact concerning the trial court’s jurisdiction over defendant, we hold the trial court failed to comply with defendant’s Rule 52(a)(2) motion, and the judgment granting a summary judgment divorce must be vacated and remanded so that the trial court may make the required findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding the trial court’s jurisdiction over defendant.

Rule 52 does not require findings of fact or conclusions of law when the court grants a directed verdict.

Seven Seventeen HB Charlotte Corp. v. Shrine Bowl of the Carolinas, Inc. · filed 2007-03-06

Moreover, the very nature of the directed verdict precludes the trial court from issuing findings of fact or conclusions of law.

Rule 52(a)(2) requires findings of fact and conclusions of law on a motion only when a party requests them.

Belanger v. Warren · filed 2007-04-17Rule 52(a)(2)

"Findings of fact and conclusions of law are necessary on decisions of any motion . . . only when requested by a party [.]" N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(2) (2005) (emphasis added). The record does not indicate that either party requested findings and conclusions to be made by the trial judge.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a trial court to find the facts specially when it must make findings of fact.

In re J.L. · filed 2007-05-01Rule 52(a)(1)

When a trial court is required to make findings of fact, it must "find the facts specially." N.C. Gen.Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (2005).

Rule 52(a)(2) requires requested findings of fact and conclusions of law on a new-trial motion when the ruling is reviewed for abuse of discretion.

North Carolina Industrial Capital, LLC v. Clayton · filed 2007-08-21Rule 52(a)(2)

However, because the trial court’s ruling on Plaintiff’s motion under Rule 59(a)(5), Rule 59(a)(6), and Rule 59(a)(9) is evaluated for an abuse of discretion, findings of fact and conclusions of law are necessary to effectuate meaningful appellate review.

Rule 52 requires a court trying a matter without a jury to make specific findings of fact and state its conclusions of law separately.

Wiseman Mortuary, Inc. v. Burrell · filed 2007-09-04Rule 52

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52 requires that a court, when trying a matter without a jury, must “find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment.”

Rule 52(a)(1) is satisfied when a trial court's finding encompasses the facts a party claims the court ignored.

State v. Bakri · filed 2007-10-16Rule 52(a)(1)

The surety first contends that the trial court's failure to include certain facts in its findings of fact violated Rule 52 of our Rules of Civil Procedure. We disagree. ... We hold that this finding of fact encompasses the facts that the surety alleges the trial court "ignored."

Rule 52(a)(1) requires findings on the facts needed to resolve contested matters, but does not require a recital of every evidentiary detail.

State v. Escobar · filed 2007-11-20(a)(1)

The trial court fulfilled its obligations under Rule 52(a)(1) because it made a specific finding of fact that Harco’s efforts resulted in locating Defendant, but the District Attorney was ultimately responsible for returning Defendant to Union County.

Rule 52(a)(2) requires findings of fact and conclusions of law on motions only when a party requests them, subject to Rule 41(b).

Baker v. Lanier Marine Liquidators, Inc. · filed 2007-12-18Rule 52(a)(2)

Rule 52(a)(2) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure provides that "[f]indings of fact and conclusions of law are necessary on decisions of any motion or order ex mero motu only when requested by a party and as provided by Rule 41(b)." N.C. Gen.Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(2)(2005). Here, there is no indication in the record that either party requested findings by the trial judge. Therefore, it was proper that the trial court made no findings of fact when issuing the order denying defendant's motion to dismiss.

Rule 52(a)(2) requires findings of fact and conclusions of law on a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction only when a party requests them.

State Ex Rel. Cooper v. Ridgeway Brands Manufacturing, LLC · filed 2008-01-15Rule 52(a)(2)

Under the provisions of N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(2), findings of fact and conclusions of law are necessary only when requested by a party.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a trial court sitting without a jury in an alimony case to find the facts specially and state its conclusions of law separately.

Pierce v. Pierce · filed 2008-02-05Rule 52(a)(1)

In alimony cases where a trial court sits without a jury, the trial court must "find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon[.]" N.C. Gen.Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (2007).

Rule 52(a)(2) does not require findings of fact when deciding a motion unless a party requests them, subject to Rule 41(b).

Vaden v. Dombrowski · filed 2007-12-04Rule 52(a)(2)

Pursuant to Rule 52 the trial court did not err in failing to make findings of fact where they were not requested by a party.

Rule 52(a)(2) does not require a trial court to make findings of fact when ruling on a motion unless a party requests them.

Rossetto USA, Inc. v. Greensky Financial, LLC · filed 2008-07-01Rule 52(a)(2)

However, absent a request by the parties, which does not appear in the record, the trial court is not required to find the facts upon which its ruling is based. N.C. Gen.Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(2) (2007).

Rule 52(a)(2) does not require findings of fact and conclusions of law when a court dismisses a complaint under Rule 12(b)(6) based only on the pleadings.

Helm v. APPALACHIAN STATE UNIVERSITY · filed 2008-12-16Rule 52(a)(2)

Here, as in G & S Business Services, the trial court's decision was based only on plaintiff's pleadings under Rule 12(b)(6). Furthermore, because we review a dismissal for failure to state a claim de novo, we would have disregarded any findings of fact or conclusions of law drafted by the trial court. Accordingly, we hold that the trial court did not err by declining to draft findings of fact and conclusions of law explaining its decision to dismiss plaintiff's complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6).

Rule 52(a) requires separate findings of fact and conclusions of law when an action is tried on the facts without a jury.

NC Dept. of Correction v. NC MEDICAL BD. · filed 2009-05-01(a)

Finally, our conclusion is consistent with the mandate to the trial court that it "find the facts specially and state separately its conclusion of law thereon" when the action is "tried upon the facts without a jury." N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a) (2007). Here, the trial court's order stated no findings of fact, and its decision did not determine or rest upon any disputed facts, but solely upon declarations and conclusions of law.

Rule 52(a) does not require special findings of fact when a trial court's decision rests solely on conclusions of law and no disputed facts.

North Carolina Department of Correction v. North Carolina Medical Board · filed 2009-05-01(a)

Finally, our conclusion is consistent with the mandate to the trial court that it “find the facts specially and state separately its conclusion of law thereon” when the action is “tried upon the facts without a jury.” N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a) (2007). Here, the trial court’s order stated no findings of fact, and its decision did not determine or rest upon any disputed facts, but solely upon declarations and conclusions of law. Defendant’s assignments of error are overruled.

Rule 52(a) requires a judge sitting as factfinder to make the ultimate findings needed to support the conclusions of law and resolve the issues raised by the pleadings.

Powers v. Tatum · filed 2009-05-05Rule 52(a)

Findings of fact 24 and 30 are the ultimate findings of fact required to support the trial court’s conclusion that petitioner’s refusal was willful.

Rule 52 applies to termination of parental rights orders and requires specific factual findings sufficient for meaningful appellate review.

In Re TP · filed 2009-07-07Rule 52(a)(1)

Rule 52 applies to termination of parental rights orders. ... Unfortunately, the skeletal orders in the record are inadequate to allow for meaningful appellate review.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a court hearing an alimony case without a jury to make special findings of fact and state its conclusions of law separately.

Keal v. Keal · filed 2009-07-07Rule 52(a)(1)

In alimony cases where a trial court sits without a jury, the trial court must "find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon[.]" N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (2007).

Rule 52(a)(2) requires findings of fact on a motion only when a party requests them; a request to amend findings for an earlier order does not request findings on a later motion.

Monaghan v. Schilling · filed 2009-06-16Rule 52(a)(2)

Before this Court, defendants argue that the trial court was required to make findings of fact as to their Rule 60(b) motion; however, “[f]hiding's of fact. . . are necessary on decisions of any motion . . . only when requested by a party[,]” N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(2). Here, defendants requested that the trial court amend its findings pursuant to Rule 52(b) rather than make findings of fact on the denial of the “Motion to Renew And Reconsider Previously-Filed Motion To Set Aside Entry of Default And Motion For Sanctions And Motion To Set Aside Entry of Default Judgment And Motion for New Trial.”

Rules 41(b) and 52(a) require findings and conclusions after an involuntary dismissal in a trial without a jury, but inadequate findings are not prejudicial when the evidence cannot support relief for the plaintiff.

Bauman v. Woodlake Partners, LLC · filed 2009-09-01Rules 41(b) and 52(a)

As a result, we conclude that, in the event the evidence presented to the trial court, even when considered in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, is insufficient to sustain a decision in Plaintiff’s favor, a failure to make adequate findings of fact and conclusions of law as required by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rules 41(b) and 52(a), will not be deemed to constitute prejudicial error.

Rule 52(a)(1) does not require written findings of fact or conclusions of law when a court decides a motion for summary judgment.

Metcalf v. Black Dog Realty, LLC · filed 2009-11-03(a)(1)

Because the order of 15 September 2008 addressed only motions to dismiss and cross-motions' for summary judgment, no written findings of fact or conclusions of law were required. Rule 52(a)(1) applies “[i]n all actions tried upon the facts . . . .” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a) (2007).

Rule 52(a) does not require ex parte domestic violence protective orders to contain findings and conclusions that fully satisfy its requirements.

Hensey v. Hennessy · filed 2009-11-17Rule 52(a)

For that reason, despite the absence of specific statutory language excluding ex parte DVPOs from the coverage of the findings and conclusions requirement of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52, we hold that such orders need not contain findings and conclusions that fully satisfy the requirements of that provision of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires findings of fact and conclusions of law adequate to permit appellate review of a decision after a condemnation hearing.

City of Charlotte v. Williams · filed 2011-03-01Rule 52(a)(1)

However, the order denying Defendant’s motion contains no findings or conclusions; it merely denies the motion without explanation. This not only violates the requirements of section 136-108 and Rule 52(a)(1), it forms an inadequate basis for this Court to conduct any type of appellate review of the merits of Defendant’s adverse possession claim.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires findings of fact to support a trial court’s conclusions of law in a nonjury case.

Cape Hatteras Electric Membership Corp. v. Lay · filed 2011-03-01Rule 52(a)(1)

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (2009) (“In all actions tried upon the facts without a jury or with an advisory jury, the court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment.”). ... Here, there are no findings of fact to support conclusion of law 33 • or that portion of conclusion of law 32 which states that NCDOR is not permitted to tax CHEMC indirectly. ... Consequently, we hold that these conclusions of law were not supported by the findings of fact or the evidence of record.

Rule 52 requires findings and conclusions that articulate the trial court’s reasoning sufficiently for appellate review.

Hoke County Board of Education v. State · filed 2012-08-21Rule 52

According to our Rules of Civil Procedure, “[i]n all actions tried upon the facts without a jury or with an advisory jury, the court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment.” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52 (2012). ... Thus, we conclude that the trial court’s rationale in reaching its decision is specifically articulated in the order. The order provides a detailed summary or findings section, followed by a separate section of conclusions.

Rule 52(a)(2) governs findings of fact and conclusions of law when a court resolves motions.

Etheridge v. Levitsky · filed 2014-01-21(a)(2)

As a result, we conclude that any obligation on the part of Judge Hight to make findings and conclusions would have been governed by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(2) rather than N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 41 or N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1).

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a judge in a nonjury trial to state findings of fact and separate conclusions of law; the findings in a custody order must support its visitation conclusions.

Burger v. Smith · filed 2015-10-06Rule 52(a)(1)

Regarding the necessity for findings, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1 Rule 52(a)(1) provides in relevant part that in “all actions tried upon the facts without a jury” the trial court “shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment.” ... We conclude that the trial court’s findings of fact reflect its consideration of this issue and support its conclusions of law.

For a provisional remedy, Rule 52(a)(2) requires findings and conclusions when a party requests them or an applicable statute expressly requires them.

Maldjian v. Bloomquist · filed 2016-02-02Rule 52(a)(2)

Pursuant to Rule 52 of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure, findings of fact and conclusions of law are necessary only when requested by a party.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a court proceeding without a jury to make specific findings of fact, state its conclusions of law separately, and direct entry of judgment.

Seraph Garrison, LLC v. Garrison · filed 2016-08-24(a)(1)

Further, because the Court has elected to proceed without a jury, the Court is required to “find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment.” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (2015).

Rule 52(a)(2) does not require findings of fact on a motion when no party requests them and Rule 41(b) does not apply.

Sessions v. Sloane · filed 2016-07-19Rule 52(a)(2)

As a result, there is no evidence in the record that indicates Defendants requested the trial court make findings of fact. Accordingly, the trial court was not required to make findings of fact, and we presume the trial court found facts sufficient to support its judgment.

Rule 52(a)(2) leaves findings of fact on a motion to the trial court’s discretion when no party requests them and Rule 41(b) does not apply.

Sessions v. Sloane · filed 2016-07-19Rule 52(a)(2)

Although findings of fact and conclusions of law are helpful for meaningful review by our appellate courts, if a party did not request the court to make findings of fact, then it is within the discretion of the trial court whether to make findings.

Rule 52(a)(2) requires findings of fact and conclusions of law on a motion only when a party requests them; without a request, an appellate court presumes the trial court found facts supporting its ruling.

Friday Invs., LLC v. Bally Total Fitness of the Mid-Atlantic, Inc. · filed 2017-11-03Rule 52(a)(2)

The underlying trial court order compelling discovery contains neither findings of fact nor conclusions of law, as neither party requested them. Therefore, we must presume that the trial court found facts sufficient to support its determination that the communications at issue were not privileged.

When neither party requests findings of fact on a motion to dismiss, the appellate court presumes findings supporting the order and reviews the record for competent evidence to support them.

Padron v. Bentley Marine Grp., LLC · filed 2018-12-04Rule 52(a)(2)

In the instant case, the trial court’s order does not contain findings of fact, nor did either party request the same. “In such a situation it is presumed that the trial court found facts sufficient to support [its] order,” State ex rel. Cooper v. Ridgeway Brands Mfg., LLC, 188 N.C. App. 302, 306, 655 S.E.2d 446, 449 (2008), “and our role on appeal is to review the record for competent evidence to support these presumed findings.” Stetser v. TAP Pharm. Prods., 162 N.C. App. 518, 520, 591 S.E.2d 572, 574 (2004); see also N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(2) (2017).

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a court deciding facts without a jury to make its own factual findings and state its legal conclusions separately.

In re T.N.H. · filed 2019-08-16Rule 52(a)(1)

Section 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) of the North Carolina General Statutes provides in pertinent part: “In all actions tried upon the facts without a jury . . . the court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law[.]” N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) (2017). ... The trial court’s findings of fact appear to be based, at least in part, on testimony provided at the hearing, sufficient to demonstrate that the trial court made an independent determination regarding the evidence presented.

Rule 52(a)(2) does not require a trial court to make specific findings of fact unless a party requests them.

McCullers v. Lewis · filed 2019-05-07Rule 52(a)(2)

Under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(2) (2017), however, the trial court is not required to make specific findings of fact unless a party so requests.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a judge in a nonjury trial to make factual findings that resolve material conflicts in the evidence and to state conclusions of law separately.

Carolina Mulching Co, L.L.C. v. Raleigh Wilmington Investors II · filed 2020-07-07Rule 52(a)(1)

Rule 52(a) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure requires a trial judge sitting without a jury to specifically find facts and state separately its conclusions of law. ... We conclude that the trial court failed to make ultimate findings of fact necessary to resolve conflicts in the evidence, and that therefore the findings do not support the conclusions of law.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires findings of ultimate facts and separate conclusions of law; evidentiary findings and a bare conclusion are insufficient in an order adjudicating a termination of parental rights petition.

In re K.R.C. · filed 2020-07-17Rule 52(a)(1)

Combined with the trial court’s bare conclusion of law5 that petitioner failed to prove that “the necessary grounds exist to terminate the [r]espondent’s parental rights[,]” these evidentiary findings do not meet the requirements of Rule 52(a)(1) as applied to adjudicatory orders under N.C.G.S. §§ 7B-1109(e) and -1110(c).

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a court trying facts without a jury to make specific findings of fact and separate conclusions of law; the same duty applies when a court grants or denies a petition to terminate parental rights.

In re K.R.C. · filed 2020-07-17Rule 52(a)(1)

Consequently, we interpret N.C.G.S. § 7B-1109(e) as placing the same duty on the trial court to “find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon,” regardless of whether the court is granting or denying a petition to terminate parental rights. N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1); see also In re T.N.H., 372 N.C. at 407, 831 S.E.2d at 59.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires findings of ultimate fact sufficient to support the conclusions of law and permit appellate review; an agreement to omit details of a child’s testimony does not remove that requirement.

Sherrill v. Sherrill · filed 2020-12-15Rule 52(a)(1)

The parties’ agreement that the trial court need not make specific findings of fact regarding what the child said does not eliminate the need for ultimate findings, as findings of fact should not be recitations of testimony.

Rule 52 requires findings of ultimate fact and separate conclusions of law; merely repeating allegations does not satisfy that requirement.

In re: H.P., I.S. · filed 2021-07-06Rule 52

Rule 52 of our rules of civil procedure mandates the trial court make findings of “facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon. . . .” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 52. ... As no evidence to support the allegations in Exhibit A was presented at the adjudication and disposition hearing, and several of the allegations in Exhibit A could not be substantiated, we hold the trial court did not, “through [the] process[] of logical reasoning,” find ultimate facts necessary to dispose of the case.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a trial court hearing a domestic violence protective order motion without a jury to make findings of fact and separately state its conclusions of law.

Milligan v. Crews · filed 2021-09-21Rule 52(a)(1)

When a trial court sits without a jury in a hearing regarding a motion for a domestic violence protection order under Chapter 50B of our General Statutes, Rule 52(a)(1) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure requires the trial court to make findings of fact, as well as separately state its conclusions of law based on those findings of fact.

Rule 52(a)(1) permits an order to incorporate allegations when the trial court makes sufficient additional findings to allow meaningful appellate review.

In re A.C. · filed 2021-08-27Rule 52(a)(1)

Even though, as we have already noted, a number of the trial court’s findings were deficient for various reasons, the remaining findings are sufficient to permit meaningful appellate review. ... As a result, we reject respondent-mother’s contention that the trial court erred by incorporating the allegations set out in the termination motion in its termination order.

Rule 52(a)(1) does not apply when a superior court reviews an administrative decision as an appellate court.

Thompson v. Union Cty. · filed 2022-06-07(a)(1)

Rule 52(a)(1) has no application in the present case.

The Rules of Civil Procedure prohibit a substitute judge from making new factual findings or conclusions of law when the judge did not preside over the hearing.

In re K.N. · filed 2022-07-15Rule 52; Rule 63

We hold a substitute judge may not make new factual findings or conclusions of law under Rule 52 and Rule 63.

Rule 43(e) requires the trial court to determine the weight and sufficiency of evidence when affidavits and exhibits are submitted without an evidentiary hearing, while Rule 52(a)(2) dispenses with specific findings of fact unless a party requests them.

Toshiba Glob. Com. Sols., Inc. v. Smart & Final Stores LLC · filed 2022-06-17Rule 43(e); Rule 52(a)(2)

In this context, when the parties have submitted affidavits and exhibits but no evidentiary hearing is held, the trial court must determine the weight and sufficiency of the evidence before it. See N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 43(e) (2021); Banc of Am. Sec. LLC v. Evergreen Int’l Aviation, Inc., 169 N.C. App. 690, 694 (2005). However, pursuant to Rule 52(a)(2) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure, the trial court need not make specific findings of fact in support of its order unless requested by a party. N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(2) (2021).

Rule 52(a)(2) does not require findings of fact or conclusions of law for a Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal when no party requests them.

Taylor v. Bank of Am., N.A. · filed 2022-11-04Rule 52(a)(2)

Pursuant to Rule 52(a)(2) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure, a trial court is not required to make factual findings and conclusions of law to support its order unless requested by a party.

Rule 52(a)(2) requires findings of fact on a Rule 12(b)(1) motion only when a party requests them.

Forsythe v. N.C. Dep't of Revenue, 2022 Ncbc 49a · filed 2022-09-09Rule 52(a)(2)

The Court is required to make findings of fact on a motion under Rule 12(b)(1) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure (the “Rule(s)”) only when requested to do so by the parties, see N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(2).

Rule 52(a)(1) requires a judge sitting without a jury to make specific findings of fact and state conclusions of law separately.

Chociej v. Richburg · filed 2023-02-21Rule 52(a)(1)

A trial judge sitting without a jury must specifically find facts and state separately its conclusions of law.

Rule 52(a)(2) does not require findings of fact on a motion to compel unless a party specifically requests them.

Williams v. Allen · filed 2022-12-16Rule 52(a)(2)

Upon our considerations of the arguments of the parties, along with a careful review of the transcript from the 31 January 2020 trial court hearing, we agree with the position of the dissenting judge in the Court of Appeals that defendants did not specifically request findings of fact regarding the statutory elements set forth in N.C.G.S. § 90-21.22A and that in the absence of such a specific request by defendants, the trial court was not required to make any findings of fact in resolving plaintiff’s motion to compel.

Rule 52 requires a trial court to make findings of fact when deciding a motion only if a party specifically requests them, subject to Rule 41(b).

Williams v. Allen · filed 2022-12-16(a)(2)

Based upon our determination that no party specifically requested that the trial court make findings of fact to support its ruling on this interlocutory motion, we conclude that the trial court was not required pursuant to Rule 52 of the Rules of Civil Procedure to make such findings and thus the trial court’s order was proper and sufficient.

Rule 52(a)(1) requires findings of the ultimate facts that support the court’s conclusions of law, but does not require a recitation of the subsidiary facts proving them.

In re: X.I.F., J.R.F. · filed 2025-02-19Rule 52(a)(1)

Contrary to respondent-father’s contention that trial courts are required to expressly explain ultimate findings with evidentiary findings, our Supreme Court has stated that: Rule 52(a) does not require a recitation of the evidentiary and subsidiary facts required to prove the ultimate facts, it does require specific findings of the ultimate facts established by the evidence, admissions and stipulations which are determinative of the questions involved in the action and essential to support the conclusions of law reached.

Rule 52(a)(2) does not require written findings of fact and conclusions of law for an order akin to a dispositive motion unless a party requests them.

State v. Alcantara · filed 2025-11-05Rule 52(a)(2)

Thus, like an order on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the order here did not require written findings of fact and conclusions of law unless they were requested by a party.

When a court grants a Rule 41(b) motion for involuntary dismissal, Rule 52(a)(1) requires specific findings of fact and separate conclusions of law.

Brutus v. Broido · filed 2025-11-05Rule 52(a)(1)

As explained above, treating Plaintiff’s motion as a Rule 41(b) motion, the trial court was required to make specific findings of fact and to separately state its conclusions.

Rule 41(b) does not provide for dismissal based on insufficient evidence in a jury trial.

Pergerson v. Williams · filed 1970-10-21Rule 41(b)

The present case was tried before judge and jury. Therefore, the reference in the judgment to Rule 41(b) was not appropriate.

Rule 41(b) permits dismissal at the close of the plaintiff’s evidence when the plaintiff has failed to prove a fact necessary for recovery.

First National Bank of Eastern North Carolina v. Black · filed 1970-12-30Rule 41(b)

The record on appeal is absolutely devoid of evidence of Barefoot’s ability to pay on 1 November 1967, the date of maturity. In our opinion defendants’ motion to dismiss at the close of plaintiff’s1 evidence should have been allowed. ... The judgment appealed from is reversed and this cause is remanded to the District Court of Harnett County for entry of judgment of dismissal under G.S. 1A-1, Rule 41(b).

Rule 41(b) allows a judge in a nonjury trial to decide the facts and enter judgment on a dismissal motion after the plaintiff’s evidence, or to defer judgment until all the evidence is heard.

Wells v. STURDIVANT LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY · filed 1971-03-31Rule 41(b)

However, under Rule 41(b), if a trial judge allows the defendant’s motion to dismiss made at the close of plaintiff’s evidence on the grounds that upon the facts and the law the plaintiff has shown no right to relief, the court, as the trier of the facts, should determine the facts and render .judgment against the plaintiff. The trial judge may decline to render any judgment until the close of all the evidence.

Rule 41(b) motions test whether the evidence permits findings supporting recovery; they do not challenge the evidentiary support for particular findings.

Pegram-West, Inc. v. Hiatt Homes, Inc. · filed 1971-10-20Rule 41(b)

A motion to dismiss under G.S. 1A-1, Rule 41, challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to permit a recovery. ... Such a motion does not raise the question of whether the particular findings made by the court are supported by the evidence, but only the question of whether any findings could be made from the evidence which would support a recovery.

Rule 41(b) permits involuntary dismissal in a nonjury trial when the plaintiff’s evidence is insufficient to establish a right to relief.

Rogers v. City of Asheville · filed 1972-05-24Rule 41(b)

Our study of the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, leads us to the conclusion that there was not sufficient evidence of negligence on the part of defendant to establish a right to relief. Therefore, denial of defendant’s motion for involuntary dismissal under Rule 41 (b) was error.

Rule 41(b) requires findings of fact under Rule 52(a) when a court grants an involuntary dismissal after the plaintiff presents evidence in a trial without a jury.

Aiken v. Collins · filed 1972-11-22Rule 41(b)

Since the present case was tried by the court without a jury, defendant’s motion should properly have been made under Rule 41(b), and before granting the motion as to either defendant, the trial court should have followed the directive in Rule 41(b) and made findings of fact as provided in Rule 52 (a). However, in this case the dismissal of plaintiff’s action as to the defendant, Edna Dare Collins, prior to making any findings of fact, resulted in no prejudice to plaintiff.

Rule 41(b) applies to trials without a jury; in a jury trial, the proper motion is for a directed verdict under Rule 50(a).

Hamm v. TEXACO INCORPORATED · filed 1973-02-28Rule 41(b)

G.S. 1A-1, Rule 41(b) is applicable where a cause is tried before the judge without a jury; a motion to dismiss under this rule is not properly available in cases being tried by jury. The proper motion would have been a motion for directed verdict under Rule 50(a).

Rule 41(b) permits a dismissal motion after the claimant presents evidence in a nonjury trial, and Rule 41(c) applies that procedure to crossclaims.

International Harvester Credit Corp. v. Ricks · filed 1972-11-22Rule 41(b), (c)

G.S. 1A-1, Rule 41(b) provides in pertinent part: “After the plaintiff, in an action tried by the court without a jury, has completed the presentation of his evidence, the defendant, without waiving his right to offer evidence in the event the motion is not granted, may move for a dismissal on the ground that upon the facts and the law the plaintiff has shown no right to relief. The court as trier of the facts may then determine them and render judgment against the plaintiff or may decline to render any judgment until the close of all the evidence.” Rule 41(c) provides that the “provisions of this rule apply to the dismissal of any counterclaim, cross claim, or third-party claim.” We hold that the court did not err in denying defendant’s motion to dismiss the cross claim.

Under Rule 41(b), a motion challenging the sufficiency of the evidence is governed by the same principles formerly used for a motion of nonsuit.

Ramsey v. Ramsey · filed 1972-11-22(b)

Appellant’s motion to dismiss, made pursuant to G.S. 1A-1, Eule 41 (b), challenged the sufficiency of the evidence to establish plaintiff’s right to relief, and in passing on the motion the trial judge was guided by the same principles expressed under our former procedure with respect to the sufficiency of the evidence to withstand the motion of nonsuit.

Rule 41(b) permits a judge in a nonjury case to weigh the evidence and dismiss a claim after the claimant rests, even if the evidence establishes a prima facie case.

Helms v. Rea · filed 1973-02-02Rule 41(b)

As trier of the facts, the judge may weigh the evidence, find the facts against plaintiff and sustain defendant's motion at the conclusion of his evidence even though plaintiff has made out a prima facie case which would have precluded a directed verdict for defendant in a jury case.

Rule 41(b) does not provide for an involuntary dismissal motion at the close of all the evidence; allowing such a motion does not prejudice the plaintiff when the court enters a judgment on the merits under Rule 52.

Castle v. BH YATES COMPANY, INC. · filed 1973-07-11Rule 41(b)

Rule 41 (b) of the Rules of Civil Procedure does not provide for a motion for involuntary dismissal made at the close of all the evidence. The fact that defendant made such a motion which is not sanctioned under the rules and that the trial judge inadvertently allowed it, in no way prejudiced plaintiff. The trial judge thereafter entered a judgment on the merits pursuant to Rule 52.

Rule 41(b) requires findings of fact to support a dismissal at the close of the plaintiff’s evidence in a nonjury trial.

Carteret County General Hospital Corp. v. Manning · filed 1973-05-23(b)

Since the order dismissing plaintiff’s claim is not supported by findings of fact as required by G.S. 1A-1, Rule 41(b), the judgment appealed from is vacated and the cause is remanded to the district court for a New trial.

Rule 41(b) replaces the former motion for nonsuit with a motion to dismiss in a trial without a jury.

Schafran v. A & H Cleaners, Inc. · filed 1973-09-12Rule 41(b)

In nonjúry trials, the former motion for nonsuit has been replaced by the motion for a dismissal. G.S. 1A-1, Rule 41(b).

Rule 41(b) permits involuntary dismissal when the court tries a case without a jury.

McNeely v. SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY · filed 1973-09-26Rule 41(b)

Since the enactment of the new Rules of Civil Procedure in 1970, this Court has repeatedly distinguished between the motion for directed verdict under Rule 50 and the motion for involuntary dismissal under Rule 41(b). The former is proper when the case is tried before a jury, and the latter is appropriate where the court sits as trier of fact.

Rule 41(b) provides the motion for testing the sufficiency of a plaintiff’s evidence in a nonjury civil trial.

Higgins v. BUILDERS AND FINANCE INCORPORATED · filed 1973-11-28Rule 41(b)

In non jury civil cases the appropriate motion by which a defendant may test the sufficiency of the plaintiff’s evidence to show a right to relief is a motion for involuntary dismissal under Rule 41 (b).

Rule 41(b) permits the trial judge in a nonjury case to evaluate the evidence without indulging inferences in favor of the plaintiff when deciding an involuntary dismissal.

Hobson Const. Co., Inc. v. Hajoca Corp. · filed 1976-03-17(b)

The trial judge’s evaluation of the evidence pursuant to a Rule 41 (b) motion to dismiss is to be made free of any limitations as to the inferences which a court must indulge in favor of plaintiff’s evidence on a motion for directed verdict.

Rule 41(b) permits dismissal of a counterclaim when the findings and conclusions support dismissal.

Hackett v. Hackett · filed 1976-10-20Rule 41(b)

Furthermore, the findings and conclusions made by the trial court are sufficient to support an order dismissing defendant’s counterclaim for betterments pursuant to G.S. 1A-1, Rule 41(b).

Rule 41(b) permits a judge in a nonjury action to weigh the evidence, find facts against the plaintiff, and grant dismissal at the close of the plaintiff’s evidence.

Neasham v. Day · filed 1977-09-07(b)

A motion to dismiss made pursuant to Rule 41(b) permits the trial judge to weigh the evidence, to find facts against the plaintiff, and to sustain defendant’s motion at the conclusion of plaintiff’s evidence even though plaintiff may have made out a prima facie case which could have precluded a directed verdict for defendant in a jury case.

Rule 41(b) permits a defendant in a bench trial to move for dismissal after the plaintiff presents evidence when the facts and law show no right to relief.

Brooks v. Brown · filed 1978-06-20(b)

“After the plaintiff, in an action tried by the court without a jury, has completed the presentation of his evidence, the defendant, without waiving his right to offer evidence in the event the motion is not granted, may move for a dismissal on the ground that upon the facts and law the plaintiff has shown no right to relief.”

Rule 41(b) allows a judge in a bench trial to defer ruling on a dismissal motion until all evidence is presented.

Passmore v. Woodard · filed 1978-08-15(b)

In a trial by the court without a jury, the judge is not compelled to find facts and pass upon a motion for dismissal at the close of plaintiff’s evidence. He may decline to render any judgment until all of the evidence is in, and, except in the clearest cases, he should follow that procedure.

Rule 41(b) permits involuntary dismissal in a nonjury trial, and the court must make findings and state separate conclusions when granting the motion.

Joyner v. Thomas · filed 1979-02-20

Where the trial court does not do so, but instead chooses to grant defendant’s motion at the close of plaintiff’s evidence, he must then find the facts and state his conclusions of law separately as required by the Rule.

Rule 41(b) permits dismissal at the close of the plaintiff’s evidence in a bench trial when the evidence fails to show a right to relief.

Craven v. Craven · filed 1979-07-03Rule 41(b)

A motion for dismissal at the close of the plaintiff’s evidence in an action tried by the court without a jury properly may be granted pursuant to G.S. 1A-1, Rule 41(b) when the plaintiff has failed to introduce evidence sufficient to show a right to relief.

Rule 41(b) allows a defendant in a nonjury civil case to test the sufficiency of the plaintiff’s evidence by moving for involuntary dismissal.

Tanglewood Land Co., Inc. v. Wood · filed 1979-03-06Rule 41(b)

In nonjury civil cases, the appropriate motion by which a defendant may test the sufficiency of the plaintiff’s evidence to show a right to relief is a motion for involuntary dismissal under G.S. 1A-1, Rule 41(b), N.C. Rules of Civil Procedure.

Under Rule 41(b), a trial court should ordinarily wait until the close of all evidence before ruling on a motion to dismiss.

Henderson County v. Osteen · filed 1979-04-20Rule 41(b)

It is well settled that the trial court, except in the clearest of cases, should decline to rule on a motion to dismiss under G.S. 1A-1, Rule 41(b), until the close of all the evidence.

Rule 41(b) governs dismissal after the plaintiff’s evidence in a non-jury trial; Rule 50 does not apply.

Benfield v. First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n of Catawba County · filed 1979-12-18Rule 41(b)

Defendant’s motion should have been made pursuant to G.S. 1A-1, Rule 41(b) rather than Rule 50 of the Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 50 has no application in a non-jury trial. This case is remanded to the trial court to enter an order dismissing this case pursuant to G.S. 1A-1, Rule 41(b), of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

In a trial without a jury, a judge deciding a Rule 41(b) motion at the close of the plaintiff’s case weighs the competent evidence and assesses witness credibility.

Bank of North Carolina, N.A. v. Investors Title Insurance · filed 1979-08-21Rule 41(b)

Under Rule 41(b), in a trial without a jury, where as here, the motion was made at the close of the plaintiff’s case, the trial judge does not consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Instead, he must consider and weigh all competent evidence before him, passing upon the credibility of the witnesses, the weight to be given their testimony, and the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom.

In a trial without a jury, Rule 41(b) replaces a motion for nonsuit with a motion for dismissal.

Phillips v. Woxman · filed 1979-11-20Rule 41(b)

In trials by the court, the former motion for nonsuit has been replaced by the motion for a dismissal. G.S. 1A-1, Rule 41(b), of the Rules of Civil Procedure. We will treat the motion for nonsuit at the close of all the evidence as a motion for dismissal.