Eldridge v. Mangum
| Decision Date | 29 November 1939 |
| Docket Number | 457. |
| Parties | ELDRIDGE et ux. v. MANGUM, Building and Electrical Inspector, et al. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Defendants filed demurrer on the ground that the complaint failed to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, for the reason that it appears from the complaint that it is a petition for a mandamus to require the officials of Raleigh to declare certain property zoned for the erection of a filling station, and that the petitioners rely upon a city ordinance relating to changes in district maps and regulations pertaining to municipal zoning, and also that at a hearing as to the zoning of the property involved there was not a three-fourths vote of the Board of Commissioners to adopt the recommendation of the Zoning Commission that the property be zoned for business, and finally that the general law provides that a three-fourths vote of the legislative body of the municipality is required to make any change in the zone maps where a protest against such change is filed by the owners of 20% of the lands adjacent to and in the rear for 100 feet of the land sought to be zoned, and opposite the land sought to be zoned for a depth of 100 feet from the street frontage.
The Court overruled the demurrer, and the defendants appealed to the Supreme Court, assigning error.
Briggs & West, of Raleigh, for plaintiffs, appellees.
P H. Busbee and Little & Wilson, all of Raleigh, for defendants, appellants.
An excerpt from the minutes of the Board of Commissioners of the City of Raleigh at a meeting on August 14, 1939, which is set forth in the complaint, is as follows:
It appears from the complaint that the petitioners base their request for a mandamus upon Section 27, Chapter VII, of the ordinances of the City of Raleigh, which reads in part:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lee v. Robertson Chemical Corp.
... ... 142 ... 'In case of conflict the ordinance must yield to the ... state law. ' State v. Freshwater, 183 N.C. 762, ... 111 S.E. 161, 162; Eldridge v. Mangum, 216 N.C. 532, ... 5 S.E.2d 721 ... As ... there must be a new trial, it is unnecessary ... ...
-
State v. Williams
...extent it conflicts with the general State law, is invalid. Lee v. Robertson Chemical Corp., 229 N.C. 447, 50 S.E.2d 181; Eldridge v. Mangum, 216 N.C. 532, 5 S.E.2d 721; State v. Prevo, 178 N.C. 740, 101 S.E. Accord, Staley v. Winston-Salem, 258 N.C. 244, 128 S.E.2d 604 (1962); State v. Lan......
-
Kass v. Hedgpeth
... ... s 160-175 and s 160-176, and that ... these ordinances were therefore invalid and ineffective as ... zoning regulations. Eldridge v. Mangum, 216 N.C ... 532, 5 S.E.2d 721; Lee v. Board of Adjustment, 226 ... N.C. 107, 37 S.E.2d 128 ... It also ... ...
-
Walker v. Town of Elkin, 671
...zoning ordinance can be modified. An ordinance adopted without notice as required by the statute can have no validity. Eldridge v. Mangum, 216 N.C. 532, 5 S.E.2d 721. The court found: 'The amendment to the general zoning ordinance went into effect after April 25, 1958. It was adopted after ......