Legal Opinion

Tar Landing Villas Owners' Ass'n v. Town of Atlantic Beach

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided October 4, 1983No. 823SC968PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAUGHN, Chief Judge.

The first question raised by petitioners on appeal is whether the trial court erred in refusing to apply the doctrine of collateral estoppel or res judicata. We affirm that part of the judgment holding that neither the doctrine of res judicata nor collateral estoppel precluded the Town from annexing petitioners’ properties.

*242The doctrine of res judicata, which bars subsequent lawsuits on a cause of action previously litigated and decided on the merits, is inapplicable in this case. See King v. Grindstaff, 284 N.C. 348, 200 S.E. 2d 799 (1973). Petitioners’ cause of action…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Parklane Hosiery Co. v. ShoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. King v. GrindstaffSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
  3. Masters v. DunstanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  4. Victory Cab Co. v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  5. Tidwell v. BookerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Reid v. AyersCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
  2. Rutherford v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1987
  3. Huyck Corp. v. Town of Wake ForestCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
  4. In Re a Declaratory Ruling by the North Carolina Commissioner of Insurance Regarding 11 N.C.A.C. 12.0319Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
  5. Rymer v. ESTATE OF SORRELLS, BY SORRELLSCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1997

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API