470 S.E.2d at 89 (internal citations omitted). The Court, therefore, held “that the [trial] court’s acceptance of that special verdict of the jury at his first trial finding that North Carolina has jurisdiction precludes defendant from relitigating the issue of jurisdiction at his second trial.” Id. Defendant acknowledges that Dial “ostensibly affirmed the offensive use of collateral estopped against a defendant,” but argues that it is “easily distinguished” because the jury, in that case, “only resolved one very limited question: the location of the crime.” To the contrary, that purportedly “limited” question was critical to any conresolved whether North Carolina had jurisdiction to prosecute the defendant at all. See In re McKinney, 158 N.C. App. 441, 443, 581 S.E.2d 793, 795 (2003) (<HOLDING>). Since the defendant in Dial could not be
holding that question of jurisdiction is  the most critical aspect of the courts authority to act  quoting harris v pembaur 84 nc app 666 667 353 se2d 673 675 1987 recognizing that the critical question is whether any present violation exists holding that the most critical factor in the analysis of a reasonable fee is the degree of success obtained holding that the most critical factor is the degree of success obtained holding that the most critical factor in determining the reasonableness of a fee award is the degree of success obtained