Yandle v. Mecklenburg County

335 S.E.2d 915, 77 N.C. App. 660, 1985 N.C. App. LEXIS 4195
CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina
DecidedNovember 5, 1985
DocketNo. 8526SC403
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 335 S.E.2d 915 (Yandle v. Mecklenburg County) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Yandle v. Mecklenburg County, 335 S.E.2d 915, 77 N.C. App. 660, 1985 N.C. App. LEXIS 4195 (N.C. Ct. App. 1985).

Opinion

HEDRICK, Chief Judge.

Preliminary injunctions are nonappealable interlocutory orders unless the appellant shows that a substantial right will be irrevocably lost if the injunction is not immediately reviewed. State v. School, 299 N.C. 351, 261 S.E. 2d 908, aff’d on rehearing, 299 N.C. 731, 265 S.E. 2d 387 (1980).

In the record before us, there is no evidence indicating that either the Town of Matthews or Mecklenburg County will be irrevocably harmed if the status quo in this case is preserved until a final hearing can be held. The arguments raised on appeal by Mecklenburg County and the Town of Matthews must await final resolution by the trial court where all the facts can be fully developed. Id.

However, that portion of the order entered 31 December 1984 which enjoins Mr. and Mrs. Yandle from “taking any action whatsoever that would affect directly or indirectly the status of the title to the property” is beyond the authority of the trial court. No party requested this order. Although a court may issue injunctions as a remedy subsidiary to and in aid of another action, such relief must be reasonably necessary to protect a party’s rights. Edmonds v. Hall, 236 N.C. 153, 72 S.E. 2d 221 (1952). There is no evidence in the record before us to justify enjoining the Yandles from exercising their right to convey their property.

For the reasons set forth above, these appeals are dismissed except that the portion of the injunction orders regarding the Yandles’ power to convey their property is vacated.

[663]*663Dismissed in part, vacated in part and remanded.

Judges Eagles and Martin concur.

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

Related

Yandle v. Mecklenburg County
355 S.E.2d 216 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
335 S.E.2d 915, 77 N.C. App. 660, 1985 N.C. App. LEXIS 4195, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yandle-v-mecklenburg-county-ncctapp-1985.