Farr v. Board of Adjustment

340 S.E.2d 521, 79 N.C. App. 754, 1986 N.C. App. LEXIS 2125
Court of Appeals of North Carolina·Decided March 18, 1986·No. No. 847SC10·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinions

PHILLIPS, Judge.

As directed by the above decision, we have given further consideration to the contentions made by the appellant in this Court that were not discussed in the decision reported in 73 N.C. App. 228, 326 S.E. 2d 382 (1985) and are of the opinion that those contentions are without merit and should be overruled. But even if the zoning ordinance in question applies to the case, and the record as we read it does not show that it was enacted before the prior property owner built the building involved, we are still of the opinion that the ordinance is unconstitutional for the reasons stated in our prior decision and that the judgment appealed from should be vacated.

Vacated.

Judge BECTON concurs. Chief Judge Hedrick dissents.

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

Farr v. Board of Adjustment, 340 S.E.2d 521, 79 N.C. App. 754, 1986 N.C. App. LEXIS 2125 (N.C. Ct. App. 1986).

340 S.E.2d 521 (Farr v. Board of Adjustment) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Farr v. Bd. of Adjustment of Rocky Mount
349 S.E.2d 576 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1986)