City of Winston-Salem v. Davis
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
VAUGHN, Judge.
Appellants bring forward three assignments of error. Their first argument is that the trial court erred in allowing plaintiff to introduce evidence of the prior purchase price of the entire tract of property and in excluding the cost of the improvements to the property. Appellants base their argument on their contention that the condemned parcel was a portion of the entire tract of land and not a separate tract. The issue of whether the condemned land is part of a tract or a whole tract must be resolved first because it determines how damages are measured.
The factors for…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
- North Carolina State Highway Commission v. HeldermanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
- Duke Power Co. v. WinebargerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
- Duke Power Co. v. Mom 'N' Pops Ham House, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
- City of Winston-Salem v. TickleCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. ForehandCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
- City of Winston-Salem v. CooperSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
- City of Winston-Salem v. CooperCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984