Breach of Contract Cases

<bold>1. Appeal and Error — appealability — interlocutory order — sovereign</bold> <bold>immunity affects substantial right</bold> <block_quote> Although the appeal from the denial of a motion to dismiss is not a final judgment and is generally not appealable, defendant county's appeal is properly before the Court of Appeals because<page_number>Page 427</page_number> it is based upon the defense of sovereign immunity which affects a substantial right warranting immediate appellate review.</block_quote> <bold>2. Immunity — sovereign — county employees — health and life insurance</bold> <bold>benefits — motion to dismiss — due process — claims under contract</bold> <bold>law — § 1983 claim</bold> <block_quote> The trial court did not err by denying defendant county's motion to dismiss on the ground of sovereign immunity plaintiff's due process, breach of contract, impairment of contractual obligations, and <cross_reference>42 U.S.C. § 1983</cross_reference> claims based on the county's retroactive change in policy requiring county employees declared disabled to have completed twenty years of continuous service to receive health and life insurance benefits rather than the five years required when plaintiff became employed by the county and when he began disability retirement because: (1) defendant is not immune against the due process claim since it was brought pursuant to Article I, Section 19 of the North Carolina Constitution; (2) while sovereign immunity remains a valid defense in tort actions, it is not a proper defense in suits arising from contract law; and (3) defendant is not immune from plaintiff's § 1983 claim since the alleged federal violation occurred as a result of defendant's official action.</block_quote>