McKillop v. Onslow County
Decision Date | 18 July 2000 |
Docket Number | No. COA99-814.,COA99-814. |
Citation | 532 S.E.2d 594,139 NC App. 53 |
Court | North Carolina Court of Appeals |
Parties | Kimberly McKILLOP, Plaintiff, v. ONSLOW COUNTY, Defendant. |
Jeffrey S. Miller, Jacksonville, for plaintiff-appellant.
Shipman & Associates, L.L.P., by Gary K. Shipman and Carl W. Thurman III, Wilmington, for defendant-appellee.
Kimberly McKillop ("plaintiff") appeals the 21 January 1999 Order of Abatement and Judgment of Civil Contempt entered by the trial court finding her in contempt of the Permanent Injunction issued by the same court on 3 July 1996, and ordering her to immediately comply with the 3 July 1996 order and allowing her to purge herself of contempt. We affirm.
The facts of this case are many and convoluted at best; however, we recite below only those pertinent to the appeal at hand. On or about 20 July 1994, agents of defendant-appellee Onslow County ("County") served notice on plaintiff that as of 21 September 1994, the county intended to enforce its "Ordinance to Regulate Adult Businesses and Sexually Oriented Businesses" ("Ordinance") in Onslow County, against plaintiff and her two businesses. Through a number of lawsuits and counter-lawsuits, plaintiff pursued having the Ordinance declared "invalid and unconstitutional" and seeking a preliminary injunction "enjoining and restraining the [County] from enforcing [the Ordinance]," and; the County pursued having the Ordinance declared valid and constitutional and praying the court "permanently enjoin the Plaintiff from operating [her businesses] Amy's Playhouse and Private Pleasures as nonconforming adult businesses and sexually oriented businesses."
On 3 July 1996 the trial court, finding the Ordinance valid, ordered plaintiff's complaint dismissed with prejudice. The trial court further ordered that:
However on appeal, the pertinent outcome of this Court's and our Supreme Court's rulings were that the County's Ordinance was "a valid exercise of the general police powers granted to the County by the General Assembly," thus the County had a right to enforce the Ordinance, requiring plaintiff to comply. Onslow County v. Moore, 129 N.C.App. 376, 382, 499 S.E.2d 780, 785 (1998). (For more information, see Onslow County v. Moore, 127 N.C.App. 546, 491 S.E.2d 670 (1997)
; Onslow County v. Moore, 347 N.C. 672, 500 S.E.2d 88 (1998).)
On 5 October 1998, the County moved for an order to show cause why plaintiff should not be held in civil contempt; which motion was allowed. That show cause hearing resulted in the County presenting affidavits in support of its position, while plaintiff refused to present evidence on the ground that she might incriminate herself in a pending criminal suit. As a result, on 21 January 1999 the trial court concluded that plaintiff was in violation of its 3 July 1996 order, finding in pertinent part that:
(Emphasis in original.) Thus the trial court held plaintiff in contempt.
Plaintiff has preserved ten assignments of error. However, due to our disposition of her appeal, we need address only three. We first address plaintiff's assigning error to the trial court's finding that she is in contempt. Plaintiff contends that there was no evidence that she was the owner, operator, or manager of the business in question, specifically, "Amy's Back." We find plaintiff's argument unpersuasive.
We begin by noting that plaintiff, in violation of N.C.R.App. P. 28(b)(5), cites almost no authority upon which she bases her arguments before this Court. That rule clearly states that N.C.R.App.P. 28(b)(5) (1999) (emphasis added). Nonetheless, we choose to go forward and address plaintiff's appeal on its merits.
Plott v. Plott, 74 N.C.App. 82, 85, 327 S.E.2d 273, 275 (1985).
The record before us reveals that in her original complaint, plaintiff admitted that she managed the two businesses, specifically, "Amy's Playhouse located at 3054 Wilmington Highway South and Private Pleasures located at 2247 Richlands Highway." In the court order imposing the permanent injunction upon plaintiff, the court specifically found that both of her establishments were in violation of the Ordinance. Plaintiff does not dispute this finding, except to say that the mere "exhibition of `specified anatomical areas in a sexually oriented or adult business located within 1,000 feet of a residence' in itself is not a violation of the Ordinance" (a contention we will address below). Neither does plaintiff dispute the finding that she
The County's witness, Detective Sergeant W.L. Condry ("Det. Condry"), testified that although plaintiff shut down her two above-named businesses, about a year later she reopened the business under the guise of ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Herndon v. Herndon, COA15–28.
...at 167. Importantly, the "privilege against self-incrimination is intended to be a shield and not a sword." McKillop v. Onslow County, 139 N.C.App. 53, 63, 532 S.E.2d 594, 601 (2000). As a result, although a witness does not "forego the right to invoke on cross-examination the privilege aga......
-
State v. Evans, No. COA08-293 (N.C. App. 10/21/2008), COA08-293
...354 S.E.2d 289 (1987). The term implies the act is done knowingly and of stubborn purpose or resistance. McKillop v. Onslow County, 139 N.C. App. 53, 61-62, 532 S.E.2d 594, 600 (2000); see also Clayton v. Clayton, 54 N.C. App. 612, 284 S.E.2d 125 (1981), andIn re Hege, 205 N.C. 625, 172 S.E......
-
Roadway Express, Inc. v. Hayes
...influence of at the time of the accident may preclude him from asserting certain affirmative defenses. McKillop v. Onslow County, 139 N.C.App. 53, 62-63, 532 S.E.2d 594, 600-01 (2000). This Court has held that "if . . . a defendant pleads an affirmative defense[,] he should not have it with......
-
Herndon v. Herndon
...the privilege against self-incrimination as to relevant matters." Id. at ––––, 777 S.E.2d at 148 (citing McKillop v. Onslow County , 139 N.C.App. 53, 64–65, 532 S.E.2d 594, 601 (2000) ). The dissent concluded that "it was within the inherent power of the trial court to ascertain from defend......