CAPITAL OUTDOOR v. GUILFORD COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, 603A01.
| Decision Date | 07 March 2002 |
| Docket Number | No. 603A01.,603A01. |
| Citation | 559 S.E.2d 547 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | CAPITAL OUTDOOR, INC., Petitioner v. GUILFORD COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, Respondent. |
Waller, Stroud, Stewart & Araneda, LLP by Betty S. Waller, Cary, for petitioner-appellee.
Guilford County Attorney's Office by Jonathan V. Maxwell, County Attorney, and Mercedes O. Chut, Deputy County Attorney, for respondent-appellant.
For the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion, we reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals as to the standard of review and remand the case to that court for consideration of the other assignments of error on the merits.
REVERSED.
To continue reading
Request your trial
37 cases
-
DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENT v. Carroll
...administrative agency under the standard of review the Court of Appeals and trial court should have applied). In Capital Outdoor, Inc. v. Guilford County Board of Adjustment, a divided panel of the Court of Appeals remanded to the trial court because it could not determine what standard of ......
-
Bailey and Associates v. Bd. of Adjustment
...Inc. v. Guilford Cty. Bd. of Adjust., 146 N.C.App. 388, 390, 552 S.E.2d 265, 267 (2001), rev'd per curiam on other grounds, 355 N.C. 269, 559 S.E.2d 547 (2002)). "If the superior court is reviewing either the sufficiency of the evidence or whether the board's decision was arbitrary and capr......
-
North Carolina Dept. of Env. V. Carroll, No. 329PA03 (NC 8/13/2004)
...administrative agency under the standard of review the Court of Appeals and trial court should have applied). In Capital Outdoor, Inc. v. Guilford County Board of Adjustment, a divided panel of the Court of Appeals remanded to the trial court because it could not determine what standard of ......
-
Early v. County of Durham, Dss
...Inc. v. Guilford County Bd. of Adjustment, 146 N.C.App. 388, 392, 552 S.E.2d 265, 268 (2001) (Greene, J., dissenting), rev'd, 355 N.C. 269, 559 S.E.2d 547 (2002) (adopting the standard of review stated in dissenting Because Early's petition for judicial review of DSS's final decision allege......
Request a trial to view additional results