# Sedman v. Rijdes

> Court of Appeals of North Carolina · November 18, 1997 · 127 N.C. App. 700

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9856733

## Case

- **Full name:** CHARLES B. SEDMAN and Wife, ELLEN S. SEDMAN, Plaintiff Appellants v. JACOB RIJDES and Wife, WILHELMINA RIJDES, and MULTIFLORA GREENHOUSES, INC., Defendant Appellees
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of North Carolina
- **Decided:** November 18, 1997
- **Citations:** 127 N.C. App. 700; 492 S.E.2d 620; 1997 N.C. App. LEXIS 1180
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Walker
- **Judges:** McGee, Arnold, Walker
- **Cited by:** 3 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9856733

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- noting that, under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 153A-340 (1991), "county zoning regulations may not affect bona fide farms, but any use of farm property for nonfarm purposes is subject to the regulations[,]" and observing that "[b]ona fide farm purposes" is defined under the statute as "…
- noting that, under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 153A-340 (1991

## Opinion text

Judge Walker
concurring.
Although I concur, I find it important to note that plaintiffs not only contend that defendants are not engaged in a “bona fide farm purpose” in accordance with N.C. Gen. Stat. § 153A-340, but also that defendants’ operation violates the Orange County Zoning Ordinance (“ordinance”).
Plaintiffs have unsuccessfully challenged defendants’ operation as being in violation of the ordinance in the past, most recently in 1988. They now contend that Orange County erred in determining that defendants’ operation “qualifies as a bona fide farm use and is therefore exempt from the County’s zoning regulations.” However, since Orange County is not a party to this action, this issue is not before us.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9856733. Public record. Not legal advice.