Keiger v. Winston-Salem Board of Adjustment
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
SHARP, Justice.
The trial judge concluded that a rezoning ordinance, instigated after petitioners’ application for a permit to construct a mobile home park on their 14.5-acre site, could have no effect whatever upon their right to the permit. Therefore, he did not adjudicate the validity or invalidity of the ordinance purporting to change the classification of petitioners’ property.
It is the rule in this State that the issuance of a building permit, to which the permittee is entitled under the existing ordinance, creates no vested right to build contrary to the provisions of a subsequently…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Ben Lomond, Inc. v. City of Idaho FallsIdaho Supreme Court · 1968
- Town of Hillsborough v. SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1969
- Heaton v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- In Re W. P. Rose Builders Supply Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
- Warner v. W & O, INCORPORATEDSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Humble Oil & Refining Co. v. Board of AldermenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
- Robins v. Town of HillsboroughSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2007
- Application of Campsites Unlimited, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
- Marriott v. Chatham CountyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2007
- Layton v. Howard County Board of AppealsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.