there is a genuine issue for trial.” N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 56(e) (2009); see In re Will of Jones, 362 N.C. 569, 573, 669 S.E.2d 572, 576 (2008) (“[Summary] judgment is appropriate only when the record shows that ‘there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that any party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.’ ”) (citations omitted). “Supporting and opposing affidavits shall be made on personal knowledge, shall set forth such facts as would be admissible in evidence, and shall show affirmatively that the affiant is competent to testify to the matters stated therein.” N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 56(e) (2009). It is well settled that Rule 56(e) affidavits must be based on the affiant’s personal knowledge. See Singleton v. Stewart, 280 N.C. 460, 467, 186 S.E.2d 400, 405 (1972) (<HOLDING>). Nonetheless, “the evidence forecast by the
holding that a defendant need not be advised of the right to terminate questioning at any time holding that a deposition that was not presented to the trial court could not be considered on appeal holding that an affidavit did not provide probable cause sufficient to validate a warrant where the affidavit stated an incorrect date uncontradicted by any other specific fact in the affidavit holding that a portion of an affidavit stating the plaintiff is advised and informed that  could not be considered holding that hearsay in affidavit which would be inadmissible in evidence at trial could not be considered on motion for summary judgment