Taylor v. City of Raleigh
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
CARSON, Judge.
The plaintiffs do not contend that improper statutory procedures were implemented concerning the rezoning ordinance. Rather, they contend that the rezoning is spot zoning and contract zoning, both of which are disapproved in this jurisdiction. Blades v. City of Raleigh, 280 N.C. 531, 187 S.E. 2d 35 (1972) ; Zopfi v. City of Wilmington, 273 N.C. 430, 160 S.E. 2d 325 (1968). Even if we are to assume that the plaintiffs are correct in their contentions that the rezoning was spot zoning and contract zoning, which we do not concede, the first question to be answered is whether the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Blades v. City of RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
- BW Acceptance Corporation v. SpencerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
- Teachey v. . GurleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
- Zopfi v. City of WilmingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
- Builders Supplies Co. of Goldsboro, NC, Inc. v. GaineySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Stutts v. SwaimCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976
- Kerik v. Davidson CountyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
- Kerik v. Davidson CountyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001