Redevelopment Commission v. Security National Bank of Greensboro
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtParker, J.
Respondent has no exceptions to Judge Preyer’s findings of fact. Therefore, it will be presumed that they are supported by competent evidence, and are binding on appeal. Tanner v. Ervin, 250 N.C. 602, 109 S.E. 2d 460.
Respondent has excepted to Judge Preyer’s second, third, fourth and fifth conclusions of law, to this part of his decree, to wit, “Petitioner Redevelopment Commission of Greensboro is entitled to take, and all of the right, title and interest of the respondent in and to, the real property described in paragraph 5 of the petition, is hereby conveyed to said commission,” and to the…
2Cases cited48 opinions
- Berman v. ParkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Belovsky v. Redevelopment AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
- Davis v. City of LubbockTexas Supreme Court · 1959
- People Ex Rel. Gutknecht v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1953
- Redevelopment Agency v. HayesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by55 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Commissioner of Insurance v. North Carolina Rate BureauSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
- In Re Inquiry Concerning Judge HardySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
- Miller v. City of TacomaWashington Supreme Court · 1963
- State ex rel. Commissioner of Insurance v. North Carolina Fire Insurance Rating BureauSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
- Martin v. North Carolina Housing CorporationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.