Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Cain v. North Carolina Department of Transportation

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided March 19, 2002No. COA01-233Published

1ConcurrenceTyson, Judge

I concur in the result of the majority. There was substantial evidence of a “sufficient connection” between the permit holder and his lessee, the person who cut the vegetation, to uphold the revocation of the permit. I disagree with the majority that it is irrelevant whether Sunshine Outdoor or Café Risque hired the violators.

At the hearing below, the Secretary of Transportation found that Richard Marshburn (“Marshburn”), agent for Sunshine Outdoor, authorized and hired Danny Moore (“Moore”), the party who cut the vegetation without a permit. This finding of fact is supported by: (1) a memo…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Neal v. Craig Brown, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
  2. Whiteco Industries, Inc. v. HarrelsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1993
  3. National Advertising Co. v. BradshawCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
  4. Northside Station Associates Partnership v. MaddryCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1992

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

Powered by the Exa API