City of Winston-Salem v. Wells

Supreme Court of North Carolina

City of Winston-Salem v. Wells

105 S.E.2d 435, 249 N.C. 148, 1958 N.C. LEXIS 437

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedNovember 5, 1958

Docket391

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 105 S.E.2d 435 (City of Winston-Salem v. Wells) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

City of Winston-Salem v. Wells, 105 S.E.2d 435, 249 N.C. 148, 1958 N.C. LEXIS 437 (N.C. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

HiggiNS, J.

The only questions presented by this appeal are whether the respondents are entitled to interest; and, if so, on what amount, and from what date. The petitioner deposited in the clerk’s office $2,860 for the property taken. The respondents objected on the ground the deposit was inadequate. Subsequent trial and judgment sustained their contention and fixed the amount of just compensation at $10,000. The respondents could not have accepted the deposit without exposing themselves to the charge that they had settled the controversy. “True, *149 ihe respondent was not obligated to accept the amount, but it was an offer subject to acceptance by her. And when she accepted it, the question of compensation was settled — and the purpose of the proceeding accomplished.” Highway Commission v. Pardington, 242 N.C. 482, 98 S.E. 2d 102. The deposit with the clerk was of no benefit to the respondents. It was intended by the City as payment in full. The respondents had to accept on that basis or not at all.

The case of DeBruhl v. Highway Commission, 247 N.C. 671, 102 S.E. 2d 229, settles the question of interest. “On the facts before us, we hold as a matter of law that petitioners are entitled to have the jury award them interest at the rate of six per cent from the day of the taking ... on whatever sum they may find to be the fair market value of their property on the taking date, such interest to be deemed an additional sum awarded to petitioners ... in payment of their property taken, as an element of the just compensation guaranteed to them by Article I, Section 17, of the North Carolina Constitution, and by the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution.”

We conclude, therefore, the respondents are entitled to interest on $10,000 from March 30, 1956 ■ — ■ the date of the taking. The judgment of the Superior Court of Forsyth County will be modified in accordance with this opinion and, as so modified, is affirmed.

Modified and Affirmed.

PARKER, J., not sitting.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

HiggiNS, J.

The only questions presented by this appeal are whether the respondents are entitled to interest; and, if so, on what amount, and from what date. The petitioner deposited in the clerk’s office $2,860 for the property taken. The respondents objected on the ground the deposit was inadequate. Subsequent trial and judgment sustained their contention and fixed the amount of just compensation at $10,000. The respondents could not have accepted the deposit without exposing themselves to the charge that they had settled the controversy. “True, *149 ihe respondent was not obligated to accept the amount, but it was an offer subject to acceptance by her. And when she accepted it, the question of compensation was settled — and the purpose of the proceeding accomplished.” Highway Commission v. Pardington, 242 N.C. 482, 98 S.E. 2d 102. The deposit with the clerk was of no benefit to the respondents. It was intended by the City as payment in full. The respondents had to accept on that basis or not at all.

The case of DeBruhl v. Highway Commission, 247 N.C. 671, 102 S.E. 2d 229, settles the question of interest. “On the facts before us, we hold as a matter of law that petitioners are entitled to have the jury award them interest at the rate of six per cent from the day of the taking ... on whatever sum they may find to be the fair market value of their property on the taking date, such interest to be deemed an additional sum awarded to petitioners ... in payment of their property taken, as an element of the just compensation guaranteed to them by Article I, Section 17, of the North Carolina Constitution, and by the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution.”

We conclude, therefore, the respondents are entitled to interest on $10,000 from March 30, 1956 ■ — ■ the date of the taking. The judgment of the Superior Court of Forsyth County will be modified in accordance with this opinion and, as so modified, is affirmed.

Modified and Affirmed.

PARKER, J., not sitting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

105 S.E.2d 435, 249 N.C. 148, 1958 N.C. LEXIS 437, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-winston-salem-v-wells-nc-1958.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack