Legal Opinion
King by and Through Warren v. State
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
Decided February 18, 1997No. COA96-310PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WALKER, Judge.
On 3 March 1989, plaintiff, Ruth A. King, by and through her at-tomey-in-fact, submitted an application for a major development permit under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA), N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 113A-100 to -134.3 (1994), to place between 10,000 and 20,000 cubic yards of fill material on her property, which consists of an eight-acre peninsula in Topsail Sound. Plaintiff planned to build a marl/rock road down the center of the property and a fifty lot subdivision along this road. Subsequently, plaintiff modified the permit application pursuant to a consent agreement with the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Lowe v. BradfordSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
- Finch v. City of DurhamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
- Weeks v. North Carolina Department of Natural Resources & Community DevelopmentCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
- King v. North Carolina Environmental Management CommissionCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1993
3Cited by4 opinions
- Shell Island Homeowners Ass'n v. TomlinsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
- Beroth Oil Co. v. North Carolina Department of TransportationCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2012
- Nies v. Town of Emerald IsleCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2015
- Town of Midland v. WayneCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2013