Legal Opinion

GENERAL MOTORS CORP., PONTIAC v. Kinlaw

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided December 31, 1985No. 8510SC217PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WHICHARD, Judge.

Petitioner contends the evidence is not sufficient to support the Commissioner’s finding that the failure to renew the franchise agreements was without “good cause.” Review of a decision by the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles is governed by N.C. Gen. Stat. 150A-51. See N.C. Gen. Stat. 20-300. An agency decision may be reversed or modified if it is “[unsupported by substantial evidence ... in view of the entire record as submitted.” N.C. Gen. Stat. 150A-5K5). This standard of review is known as the “whole record” test. Thompson v. Board of Education, 292 N.C. 406, 410, 233 S.E.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Thompson v. Wake County Board of EducationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
  2. Ridge Community Investors, Inc. v. BerrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
  3. Childers v. Parker's, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  4. In Matter of RogersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  5. Mazda Motors of America, Inc. v. Southwestern Motors, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1979

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. CG&T Corp. v. Board of Adjustment of WilmingtonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1992
  2. North Carolina State Bar v. TalfordSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2003
  3. Matter of KozyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988
  4. Whittington v. North Carolina Department of Human ResourcesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
  5. Al Smith Buick Co., Inc. v. Mazda Motor of America, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1996

7 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