Kenco Petroleum Marketers, Inc. v. State Highway Commission
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtLake, J.
U.S. Highway 29-70 Bypass, at the location in question on this appeal, is a controlled access facility. G.S. 136-89.49 (2).
There can be no doubt of the authority of the State Highway Commission, upon its finding that the construction and use of a driveway, affording direct access from adjoining property onto such highway, would be or is an obstruction to the free flow of traffic thereon, or a hazard to the safety of travelers upon the highway, to forbid the construction of the driveway or to prohibit its further use. G.S. 136-89.61; Hedrick v. Graham, 245 N.C. 249, 96 S.E. 2d 129. It is…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hedrick v. GrahamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- Moses v. State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
- Wofford v. North Carolina State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
- Snow v. North Carolina State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
- Abdalla v. State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State Highway Commission v. YarboroughCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969
- Haymore v. North Carolina State Highway CommissionCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1972
- Prestige Realty Co. v. State Highway CommissionCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1968
- City of Winston-Salem v. RobertsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
- French v. State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.