Legal Opinion

Durham Council of the Blind v. Edmisten

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 4, 1986No. 8510SC431PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WEBB, Judge.

The first question posed by this appeal is whether the plaintiff may proceed by a civil action for an injunction against the enforcement of a criminal statute. G.S. 14-309.5 provides that it is a Class H felony to operate a bingo game without a license. The plaintiff seeks to avoid prosecution under this statute. The general rule is that equity will not restrain the enforcement of a statute providing a criminal penalty for its violation. D & W, Inc. v. Charlotte, 268 N.C. 577, 151 S.E. 2d 241, supplemental opinion, 268 N.C. 720, 152 S.E. 2d 199 (1966). An exception to this rule is…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Roller v. AllenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  2. D & W, INC. v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  3. D & W, INC. v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  4. Hursey v. Town of GibsonvilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  5. Walker v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Animal Protection Society of Durham, Inc. v. StateCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989
  2. Jordan v. Civil Service Board of CharlotteCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
  3. Commonwealth v. Louisville Atlantis Community/Adapt, Inc.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1997
  4. Coucoulas/Knight Properties, LLC v. Town of HillsboroughCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009
  5. Durham Highway Fire Protection Ass'n v. BakerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API