Barbour v. Barbour
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA No. COA16-782 Filed: 5 July 2017 Wake County, No. 15 CVD 5272 MYRTLE BARBOUR, Plaintiff, v. STACI BARBOUR (ROSS), Defendant. Appeal by Defendant from orders entered 30 March 2016 and 1 April 2016 by Judge Louis Meyer III in Wake County District Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 17 May 2017. Sandlin Family Law Group, by Deborah Sandlin, for the Plaintiff-Appellee. Elisabeth P. Clary for Plaintiff-Appellee Wake County Child Support. Staci D. Ross, Defendant-Appellant, pro se. DILLON, Judge. Staci Barbour (Ross) (“Mother”) appeals from orders of the trial court setting the amount of child support to be paid by Mother for the support of her daughter. I. Background BARBOUR V. BARBOUR Opinion of the Court This matter arises from an underlying custody dispute involving Mother’s minor child. Litigation involving the minor child began in 2001 and has resulted in approximately twelve appeals to our Court and our Supreme Court. In March 2016, Wake County Child Support Enforcement filed a motion for order to show cause on behalf of Plaintiff Myrtle C. Barbour, the minor child’s maternal grandmother and current custodian, based on Mother’s failure to submit court-ordered child support payments. After a hearing, the trial court entered two orders setting the amount of child support and continuing the show cause hearing. Mother appealed. II. Analysis On appeal, Mother has failed to make any argument regarding the two child support orders from which she has appealed. Rather, Mother makes arguments regarding an order concerning child custody which was entered in 2015. According to the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure, any party entitled to appeal from an order rendered in a civil action may take appeal by filing notice of appeal “within thirty days after entry of judgment.” N.C. R. App. P. 3. While the record shows that Mother did give notice of appeal of the 2015 Order, she failed to perfect her appeal of that order. If Mother wanted to submit arguments to our Court regarding the 2015 Order, she should have done so by properly perfecting her appeal of that order. See Bailey v. State, 353 N.C. 142, 156, 540 S.E.2d 313, 322 (2000) -2- BARBOUR V. BARBOUR Opinion of the Court (“In order to confer jurisdiction on the state’s appellate courts, appellants of lower court orders must comply with the requirements of Rule 3 of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.”). Rule 3 is “mandatory and must be observed.” Id. Mother has otherwise failed to present any argument in her brief regarding the two orders from which she has properly appealed. Therefore, any argument challenging those orders is deemed abandoned. See N.C. R. App. P. 28 (“Issues not presented and discussed in a party’s brief are deemed abandoned.”). Mother has not made any reviewable challenge to the trial court’s orders which are the subject of this current appeal; and, therefore, we affirm the orders. AFFIRMED. Judges ZACHARY and BERGER concur. Report per Rule 30(e). -3-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
