Legal Opinion

Cockrell v. City of Raleigh

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided August 3, 1982No. 141A81PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEYER, Justice.

I

The primary question presented for review is whether in a municipal annexation proceeding the City is required to include in its annexation report plans for extending into the proposed annexation area municipal services other than those enumerated in G.S. § 160A-47Í3). For the reasons stated herein we hold that it is not and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

At the trial of this case the petitioners attempted to present evidence that the Annexation Report and Annexation Ordinance were defective by reason of their failure to include plans to extend bus service and cable…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Huntley v. PotterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  2. In re Annexation Ordinance Adopted by the City of New BernSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  3. In Re Annexation Ordinances Nos. 866-870, Etc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  4. In Re Annexation Ordinance No. 300-XSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  5. In Re Annexation Ordinance D-21927 Adopted by City of Winston-SalemSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Davidson County v. City of High PointSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
  2. Barnhardt v. City of KannapolisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994
  3. Wallace v. Town of Chapel HillCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989
  4. Matheson v. City of AshevilleCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1991
  5. Parkwood Ass'n, Inc. v. City of DurhamCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1996

4 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