Case law

State v. Rogers

153 N.C. App. 203 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 1, 2002

State v. Brown, 87 N.C. App. 13, 22 , 359 S.E.2d 265, 270 (1987); Cf. State v. Haislip, 79 N.C. App. 656, 658 , 339 S.E.2d 832, 834 (1986). … Brown, 87 N.C. App. at 22-24 , 359 S.E.2d at 270-71 .

Webb Ex Rel. Bumgarner v. Nicholson

178 N.C. App. 362 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 5, 2006

Webb alleged that Nicholson and the Board negligently caused him injury. … Moreover, “[b]y statute and under traditional common-law principles, . . . the superintendent and principal are agents of the board.” Abell v. Nash County Bd. of Education, 71 N.C.

PHG Asheville, LLC v. City of Asheville

262 N.C. App. 231 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 6, 2018

See Handy v. PPG Indus., 154 N.C. … Rather than specifically addressing each of the Board of Adjustment’s findings of fact, this Court stated: “Many of the Board’s findings of fact to support its conclusions are based solely upon opponents’ evidence and wholly

Hinson v. Hinson

17 N.C. App. 505 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Mar 14, 1973

In Bunker v. … S. v. Leffler, 11 Peters, 101 .

Brewer v. Brewer

165 N.C. App. 274 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 6, 2004

Brown v. Brown, 77 N.C. App. 206 , 207, 334 S.E.2d 506 , 507 (1985), disc. review denied, 315 N.C. 389 , 338 S.E.2d 878 (1986). … Brown, 77 N.C. App. at 208 , 334 S.E.2d at 508 . A right is substantial only when it "will clearlybe lost or irremediably adversely affected if the order is not reviewable before final judgment." Blackwelder v.

Watson v. Dixon

130 N.C. App. 47 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 7, 1998

See Denning-Boyles v. WCES, Inc., 123 N.C. App. 409 , 473 S.E.2d 38 (1996); Brown v. Burlington Industries, Inc., 93 N.C. … Brown, 93 N.C. App. at 437 , 378 S.E.2d at 236 (citing Carolina Equip. *54 Co. v. Anders, 265 N.C. 393 , 144 S.E.2d 252 (1965)).

In re Twin County Motorsports, Inc.

230 N.C. App. 259 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 5, 2013

Instead, Cherry appeared on Twin County’s behalf, and DMV Hearing Officer Linda Brown allowed him to represent Twin County pro se. … Servs., PLLC v. N.C. Dep’t of Envtl. & Natural Res., 187 N.C.

Lee v. Wake County

165 N.C. App. 154 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 6, 2004

Lambeth v. Thomasville, 179 N.C. 452, 454 , 102 S.E. 775, 776 (1920). … Corp. v. Cty. of Durham, 143 N.C. App. 97 , 545 S.E.2d 243 (2001).

State v. Teague

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 1, 2022

STATE V. … Thus, the brown material is not within the Industrial Hemp Act’s  STATE V.

MMR HOLDINGS, LLC. v. City of Charlotte

174 N.C. App. 540 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 15, 2005

Rhyne v. K-Mart Corp., 358 N.C. 160, 188 , 594 S.E.2d 1, 20 (2004). … Variety Theatres, Inc. v.

State v. Revels

250 N.C. App. 754 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 6, 2016

A series of unanimous resolutions were approved at the meeting including that (1) RST operations would be transferred to the company's headquarters at 1300 South Dekalb Street in Shelby, North Carolina; (2) Doug Brown ("Brown … See State v.

Onslow Wholesale Plumbing & Electrical Supply, Inc. v. Fisher

60 N.C. App. 55 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 21, 1982

In Kessler v. … In Vulcanized Rubber & Plastics Company v.

Durham Green Flea Mkt. v. City of Durham

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 3, 2024

However, if a petitioner contends the board’s decision was based on an error of law, de novo review is proper. Lipinski v. Town of Summerfield, 230 N.C. … Where the petitioner alleges “‘the Board’s decision was based on an error of law, ‘de novo’ review is proper.’” Sun Suites Holdings, LLC v. Board of Aldermen of Garner, 139 N.C.

Whichard v. CH Mortg. Co.

789 S.E.2d 568 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 21, 2016

Intercraft Industries Corp. v. Morrison, 305 N.C. 373 , 376, 289 S.E.2d 357 , 359 (1982). The Board of Review's conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. N.C. Gen.Stat. § 96-15(i) ; Housecalls Nursing Servs., Inc. v. … Morrison, 305 N.C. 373 , 376, 289 S.E.2d 357 , 359 (1982), and correctly held that the Board's conclusion was without merit. V. Conclusion We affirm superior court's award of unemployment benefits to the claimant.

Hayes v. Town of Fairmont

130 N.C. App. 125 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 7, 1998

the status of the ordinance, including when the ordinance would be voted on by the Board. … Board of Education, 47 N.C.

McDowell v. Randolph Cty.

808 S.E.2d 513 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 5, 2017

(quoting Thompson v. Board of Education, 292 N.C. 406, 410, 233 S.E.2d 538, 541 (1977)). Defendant-Board reached its decision to rezone the Subject Property by granting the Lumber Company’s modified site plan. … MCDOWELL V.

George v. Town of Edenton

31 N.C. App. 648 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Mar 7, 1977

In re Markham, 259 N.C. 566 , 131 S.E. 2d 329 (1963); Allred v. City of Raleigh, 277 N.C. 530 , 178 S.E. 2d 432 (1971). … Allred v. City of Raleigh, supra.

Friend-Novorska v. Novorska

131 N.C. App. 508 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 1, 1998

v. … Brown, 72 N.C.

Donoho v. City of Asheville

153 N.C. App. 110 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 17, 2002

At this point, plaintiff and the Board conceded that the Title V permit fees were not at issue in this case and the trial court issued an order dismissing the Title V claim on 15 May 2001. … The inquiry addressed by [Board of Education v.

Scotland County Department of Social Services ex rel. Powell v. Powell

155 N.C. App. 531 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 31, 2002

N.C.G.S. § 50-13.4(c); see Browne v. Browne, 101 N.C. App. 617, 623 , 400 S.E.2d 736, 740 (1991). … See Gowing v. Gowing, 111 N.C. App. 613, 617 , 432 S.E.2d 911, 913 (1993); Browne, 101 N.C. App. at 624 , 400 S.E.2d at 741 . *537 In Guilford County ex rel. Easter v.