Legal Opinion

Safrit v. Costlow

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 20, 1967No. 121PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBobbitt, J.

Judge Latham ruled in the separate action (No. 110 on our docket) that the 1963 statute, to wit, Chapter 1189, Session Laws of 1963, referred to in the quoted paragraph of the plan, was unconstitutional and void as violative of Article II, Section 29, of the Constitution of North Carolina. As to this, as set forth in the opinion in the separate action, this Court is in accord. Defendants may not predicate rights upon said 1963 statute.

The court ruled correctly that this action was timely and properly brought pursuant to G.S. 160-453.5 (h). The court’s further rulings appear to be in accord…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. St. George v. HansonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  2. Board of Managers of the James Walker Memorial Hospital v. City of WilmingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  3. Young v. RobertsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. King v. BaldwinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  2. In Re Annexation Ordinance No. 300-XSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  3. Sutton v. FiggattSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  4. Cockrell v. City of RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  5. Buckland v. Town of Haw RiverCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API