Legal Opinion
In Re Appeal of Parker
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided June 22, 1938PublishedCited by 45 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
STACY, C. J., and WINBORNE, J., dissent.
2DissentClarkson, J.
The city of Greensboro has adopted a zoning ordinance which is now in force, the pertinent provisions of which are as follows:
"Section 13. Set Back Building Lines.
"(a) Except as specified in sections 13 and 17, no part of any building or structure shall be within 25 feet of any street line in any residence district."
"Section 17. Projection and Encroachments in Yards and Courts.
"(f) The set back and yard requirements of this ordinance shall not apply to any necessary retaining wall, or to any fence or wall which is less than five feet high and less than…
3Cases cited20 opinions
- Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Hadacheck v. SebastianSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Nectow v. City of CambridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
- Rast v. Van Deman & Lewis Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Thomas Cusack Co. v. City of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by45 opinions
- Blades v. City of RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
- A-S-P Associates v. City of RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
- Lee v. . Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
- Allred v. City of RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- Zopfi v. City of WilmingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.