Carolina-Virginia Coastal Highway v. Coastal Turnpike Authority
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.
Our examination of the challenged statute impels the conclusion that it is repugnant to three sections of the State Constitution. For immediate purposes of decision, it would suffice to rest decision on one section only. However, against the eventuality that this would serve only to extend the litigation and lead to further adverse decisions following piecemeal amendatory legislation, we deem it appropriate to discuss the statute in the light of each section of the Constitution which it impinges. We treat them seriatim. The questions posed are these:
1. Whether the statute in attempting to…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- State v. . HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Wells v. Housing Authority of the City of WilmingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
- Pue v. . Hood, Comr. of BanksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- In re Incorporation of Village of North MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1896
- Durham Provision Co. v. DavesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by73 opinions
- Adams v. North Carolina Department of Natural & Economic ResourcesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
- A-S-P Associates v. City of RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
- Jackson v. Guilford County Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1969
- McIntyre v. ClarksonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
- Martin v. North Carolina Housing CorporationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
68 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.