Capital Outdoor, Inc. v. Guilford County Board of Adjustment
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1DissentGreene, Judge
The majority holds the standard of review utilized by the Guilford County Superior Court cannot be determined and thus this case must be reversed and remanded. I disagree. The superior court stated in its judgment that the Guilford County Board of Adjustment’s (the Board) “interpretation ... of ‘residentially zoned property’ was reasonable [and] did not constitute [an] error of law.” Whether the superior court utilized a whole record review or a de novo review in reaching this conclusion is immaterial, “[s]ince [it] specifically concluded that the . . . Board did not commit an error of law.”…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- ACT-UP Triangle v. Commission for Health ServicesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1997
- State Ex Rel. Utilities Commission v. EdmistenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
- Westminster Homes, Inc. v. Town of Cary Zoning Board of AdjustmentCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
- Associated Mechanical Contractors, Inc. v. PayneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1996
- Barrett v. North Carolina Psychology BoardCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.