SURRATT v. SURRATT (2024)

Defendant appeals from an order entered 2 December 2022 granting plaintiff's motion to modify child custody, denying defendant's motions to modify child custody, vacating a show cause order, and denying defendant's motion for contempt. We dismiss this appeal for substantial noncompliance with our appellate rules.

Here, defendant's “[f]ailure to include the certificate of service for a notice of appeal in the record is a violation of Rule 3 and Rule 26 of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.” Ribble v. Ribble, 180 N.C. App. 341, 342 (2006); see also N.C.R. App. P. 3(c), (e), 26(b). While a technical error in service may be “non-jurisdictional and is not a substantial or gross violation of the appellate rules[,]” dismissal may be warranted if such an error “materially impede[s] the adversarial process or impair[s] our ability to examine the merits of this appeal.” MNC Holdings, LLC v. Town of Matthews, 223 N.C. App. 442, 447 (2012). We can find no indication plaintiff was ever notified of this appeal. Plaintiff in this case has not waived failure of service and “has not filed a brief or any other document with this Court or otherwise participated in this appeal.” Ribble, 180 N.C. App. at 343.

Moreover, the Record on Appeal substantially fails to comply with Rule 9 as to the composition of the Record on Appeal and defendant's “brief violates [Appellate] Rule 28(b)(6) to such an extent that we deem each argument presented to be abandoned.” K2HN Constr. N.C., LLC v. Five D Contractors, Inc., 267 N.C. App. 207, 213 (2019). Defendant's “failure to present appropriate argument supported with citations to authority and the record consistent with Rule 28(b)(6) constitutes a default precluding substantive review.” Id. at 215 (cleaned up); see also Dogwood Dev. & Mgmt. Co., LLC v. White Oak Transp. Co., 362 N.C. 191, 200 (2008).

DISMISSED.

Report per Rule 30(e).

PER CURIAM.

Before a panel consisting of Chief Judge DILLON and Judges STROUD and GORE.