an interlocutory order. “Generally, there is no right of immediate appeal from interlocutory orders and judgments.” Sharpe v. Worland, 351 N.C. 159, 161, 522 S.E.2d 577, 578 (1999). N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-27(d)(l) (2009), however, authorizes an appeal from an interlocutory order that affects a substantial right. “[W]hen, as here, a party asserts a statutory privilege which directly relates to the matter to be disclosed under an interlocutory discovery order, and the assertion of such privilege is not otherwise frivolous or insubstantial, the challenged order affects a substantial right under sections l-277(a) and 7A-27(d)(1).” Sharpe, 351 N.C. at 166, 522 S.E.2d at 581. This appeal is, therefore, properly before us. See Armstrong v. Barnes, 171 N.C. App. 287, 290-91, 614 S.E.2d 371, 374 (<HOLDING>), disc. review denied, 360 N.C. 60, 621 S.E.2d
recognizing that courts have discretion to exclude evidence as a sanction for violation of a discovery order holding challenged discovery order affected substantial right because assertions of statutory privilege relate directly to the matters to be disclosed under the trial courts interlocutory discovery order holding that an order was interlocutory in nature despite the trial courts certification of the order as a final appealable judgment holding that a discovery exception to a statute of limitation applies only to the discovery of facts not discovery of the law recognizing trial courts decision on discovery issues implies a finding that requested discovery was not reasonably available