Treants Enterprises, Inc. v. Onslow County
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
WELLS, Judge.
Plaintiff assigns error to the trial court’s conclusion that the ordinance at issue in the present case is not vague or overly broad and not in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 19 of the North Carolina Constitution.
Plaintiff contends that the ordinance is vague and overbroad, violating both the federal and state constitutions. The doctrines of vagueness and overbreadth are primarily concerned with rights and privileges protected by the federal constitution. In defining the vagueness doctrine the Supreme Court of the…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Buckley v. ValeoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Broadrick v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. ArnoldCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
- Maynor v. Onslow CountyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1997
- State v. HinesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1996
- LIBERTARIAN PARTY OF NC v. StateCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009
- Hest Technologies, Inc. v. State Ex Rel. PerdueCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2012
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.