Taborn v. Hammonds
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
JOHNSON, Judge.
Plaintiffs first argument is that there is not substantial evidence to support the Board’s finding that he was discharged in accordance with the Board’s reduction in force policy. The General Assembly has statutorily prescribed our scope of review as follows:
Sec. 150A-51 Scope of review; power of court in disposing of case.
The court may affirm the decision of the agency or remand the case for further proceedings; or it may reverse or modify the decision if the substantial rights of the petitioners may have been prejudiced because the agency findings, inferences, conclusions, or…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. VolpeSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Withrow v. LarkinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Federal Trade Commission v. Cement InstituteSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Thompson v. Wake County Board of EducationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
- Taylor v. CrispSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Romig v. Jefferson-Pilot Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
- Taborn v. HammondsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
- Hope v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of EducationCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1993
- Herron v. N.C. Bd. of Examiners for Eng'rs & SurveyorsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016
- In Re North Wilkesboro Speedway, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2003
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.