TYSON CHAMBER’S 2017 STATISTICS FROM THE N.C. COURT OF APPEALS

Raleigh, NC – Judge John M. Tyson promised citizens to reduce delays for parties awaiting the outcome of their appeals, citing: “Justice delayed is justice denied”. Tyson was re-elected in 2014, after previously serving an eight-year term from 2001-2009, and returned to the North Carolina Court of Appeals in 2015. The Court of Appeals celebrated its 50 th Anniversary in 2017 and held numerous court sessions across North Carolina.

Judge Tyson has released updated statistics highlighting the total number of cases he heard and opinions he filed during the 2017 calendar year. In the 255 cases his panels heard, Tyson authored 85 majority opinions. He also filed 11 concurring and/or dissenting opinions, totaling 96 total opinions filed during 2017. His Chambers 2015 and 2016 statistics of consistent performance can be found here.

Of these opinions, which received further review in the Supreme Court, 15 were affirmed or left undisturbed by the Supreme Court of North Carolina, and one was reversed. Two of Judge Tyson’s dissenting opinions were adopted by the Supreme Court. One opinion, upholding a conviction for First Degree Murder, over a dissenting opinion was unanimously affirmed by the Supreme Court of North Carolina, and was further reviewed and left undisturbed by the Supreme Court of the United States.

Judge Tyson also announced his chamber’s average time between the dates the appeal was heard by the court, and his majority opinions being filed. Court policy allows up to 90 days for opinions to be filed after the appeal is heard by the court. Judge Tyson’s average time for his majority opinions from the hearing to the filing date during 2017 was 30 days.

“Our Chamber continues to achieve these results, with the cooperation of the other judges and staff at the N.C. Court of Appeals,” Tyson said. “Many parties have been awaiting the finality of their appeal for year or more since the trial court or agency entered its judgment and order. Efficiency, correctness and promptness promotes respect for the Judicial Branch.”