Bryan v. Wilson, 91

• Decision Date: 20 March 1963
• Docket Number: No. 91,91
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: J. N. BRYAN, Jr., Ercell S. Webb and wife, Sarah C. Webb, Gilbert Peel, J. S. Jenkins, Ed Parkenson, Jr., M. K. Blount and wife, Florence T. Blount, and all other citizens and residents of Greenville similarly situated who would join in this proceeding, Protestors, v. J. W. WILSON, Building Inspector of the City of Greenville, the Board of Adjustment of the City of Greenville, Morris Brody and Van C. Fleming, Jr., Respondents.

Page 68

130 S.E.2d 68

259 N.C. 107

J. N. BRYAN, Jr., Ercell S. Webb and wife, Sarah C. Webb Gilbert Peel, J. S. Jenkins, Ed Parkenson, Jr., M. K. Blount and wife, Florence T. Blount, and all other citizens and residents of Greenville similarly situated who would join in this proceeding, Protestors, v. J. W. WILSON, Building Inspector of the City of Greenville the Board of Adjustment of the City of Greenville Morris Brody and Van C. Fleming, Jr., Respondents.

No. 91

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 20, 1963

Fred T. Mattox, Albion Dunn, Greenville, for protestor, appellants.

James & Speight, W. H. Watson, and R. B. Lee, Greenville, for respondent, appellees.

SHARP, Justice.

To interpret the zoning ordinance which governs this case we must determine whether the words public buildings in Subsection 4 are an independent term in the series or are ejusdem generis with 'schools, institutions of an educational or philanthropic nature.' If they are the former, the building permit was properly issued; if the latter, it was not. A Board of Adjustment cannot amend an ordinance. Lee v. Board of Adjustment, 226 N.C. 107, 37 S.E.2d 128, 168 A.L.R. 1.

In a narrow sense a public building is one owned and held by national, state, county, or municipal authorities for public use. In a broad sense it has been defined as a building which may be fairly deemed to promote a public purpose or to serve a public use, and the term does not necessarily imply ownership by a governmental unit or agency. 12 C.J.S. Building p. 385. An acceptable definition appears in a syllabus by the Georgia Court in Shepherd v. State, 16 Ga.App. 248, 85 S.E. 83: 'All buildings held, used, or controlled exclusively for public purposes by any department or branch of government, state, county or municipal, are public buildings; and this is true without reference to the ownership of the building or of the realty upon which it is situated.'

A post office is a building used by the United States Government for the receipt, handling and delivery of mail and the transaction of other business in connection with the postal service. The postal system is for the benefit of the whole public and a post office is, without any doubt, a public building.

The basic rule for the construction of ordinances is to ascertain and effectuare the intention of the municipal legislative body. This intention must be gleaned primarily from the language of the ordinance. 62 C.J.S. Municipal Corporations § 442f (1) (2). One of the aids in ascertaining the legislative intent is the doctrine of ejusdem generis which this Court applied in Chambers v. Board of Adjustment, 250 N.C. 194, 108 S.E.2d 211, 74 A.L.R.2d 412, cited in appellants' brief. That case interpreted a Winston-Salem ordinance which required, as a condition for the construction of multi-family dwellings, 'garage or other satisfactory automobile storage space' on the premises. This Court said: 'It is a well-settled rule of construction, applicable to statutes and ordinances, that under the doctrine ejusdem generis, when enumerations by specific words or terms are used, and they are followed by general words or terms, the general shall be held to refer to the same...