Legal Opinion

Wagoner v. Hiatt

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided August 3, 1993No. 9221SC417PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORR, Judge.

Respondent contends that the Division of Motor Vehicles was authorized under N.C.G.S. § 20-19(d) and (j) to revoke petitioner’s driver’s license for four years. We agree.

Petitioner correctly argues that the statute should be given its plain meaning, and the plain meaning of N.C.G.S. § 20-19(d), when read alone, does support her contention that the four-year revocation was unauthorized. N.C.G.S. § 2049(d) provides:

When a person’s license is revoked under subdivision (2) of G.S. 20-17 [which requires revocation for the conviction of an impaired driving offense] and the person has…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Campbell v. First Baptist Church of DurhamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  2. State v. North Carolina Reinsurance FacilitySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  3. Harrell v. ScheidtSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  4. Justice v. ScheidtSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Jordan Ex Rel. Winston v. Foust Oil Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994
  2. State v. CaldwellCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1997
  3. Lexington Telephone Co. v. Davidson Water, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1996

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

Powered by the Exa API