Decker v. Coleman
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtParker, J.
The order appealed from adversely affects a substantial right ■of the appellants and the appeal is, therefore, not premature. G.S. 1-277; Board of Elders v. Jones, 273 N.C. 174, 159 S.E. 2d 545; Cablevision v. Winston-Salem, 3 N.C. App. 252, 164 S.E. 2d 737.
Appellants’ first contention is that the trial court erred in Its interpretation of the proviso in City Ordinance No. 525; that the language therein that the defendants “be required to maintain inviolate a 50-foot buffer zone,” should not be interpreted, as was done by the trial court, so as to prohibit defendants from “engaging in any…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Jackson v. Guilford County Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1969
- Zopfi v. City of WilmingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
- Board of Provincial Elders of the Southern Province of the Moravian Church v. JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
- Schloss v. JamisonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
- Walker v. Town of ElkinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Anderson House, LLC v. Mayor of RockvilleCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2008
- Kerik v. Davidson CountyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
- Massey v. City of CharlotteCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
- State v. GarrenCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994
- Kerik v. Davidson CountyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.