Woodward v. Cloer
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
JOHNSON, Judge.
The question dispositive of this appeal is whether the trial court erred in applying the reasonable use test of Pendergrast v. Aiken, 293 N.C. 201, 236 S.E. 2d 787 (1977) to the case under discussion. We conclude that application of the Pendergrast rule was error and therefore remand the case to the trial court so that the evidence of the parties may be considered in its true legal light. See A.M.E. Zion Church v. Union Chapel A.M.E. Zion Church, 64 N.C. App. 391, 308 S.E. 2d 73 (1983), disc. rev. denied, 310 N.C. 308, 312 S.E. 2d 649 (1984) (bench trial; new trial appropriate…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Pendergrast v. AikenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
- Cleveland Realty Company v. HobbsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
- Hawthorne v. Realty Syndicate, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
- Johnson v. City of Winston-SalemSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
- Board of Transportation v. Terminal Warehouse Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Gittens v. Virginia Employment CommissionChesapeake County Circuit Court · 2010
- Lakeview Condominium Association v. Village of PinehurstCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2007
- Walker v. BRSS, LLCCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2007