ONSLOW COUNTY v. PHILLIPS (1997)

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

ONSLOW COUNTY, Plaintiff, v. Guy J. PHILLIPS, and wife, Lynda A. Phillips, and any heirs, assigns or devisees of Guy J. Phillips and wife, Lynda A. Phillips, or any other person or entity claiming thereunder, Defendants,
Betty M. Russell, Alex Warlick, Jr., Trustee, NCNB National Bank of North Carolina now Nationsbank, Marshall F. Dotson, Jr., Trustee, Lienholders. ONSLOW COUNTY, Plaintiff, v. Guy J. PHILLIPS, and wife, Lynda A. Phillips, and any heirs, assigns or devisees of Guy J. Phillips, and wife, Lynda A. Phillips, or any other person or entity claiming thereunder, Defendants. (Two Cases).
ONSLOW COUNTY, Plaintiff, v. Guy J. PHILLIPS, and wife, Lynda A. Phillips, and any heirs, assigns or devisees of Guy J. Phillips, and wife, Lynda A. Phillips, or any other person or entity claiming thereunder, Defendants, NCNB National Bank of North Carolina now Nationsbank, Marshall F. Dotson, Jr., Trustee, Lienholders.

No. 385A96.

Decided: June 06, 1997

Roger A. Moore, Jacksonville, for plaintiff-appellant. Jeffrey S. Miller, Jacksonville, for defendants-appellees. North Carolina Association of County Commissioners by Lesley F. Moxley, Assistant Durham County Attorney; James B. Blackburn, III, General Counsel; and Kimberly M. Grantham, Assistant General Counsel, Raleigh, amicus curiae.

The plaintiff's right of appeal arises from an opinion of Judge Walker concurring in part and dissenting in part from the majority opinion in the Court of Appeals. The sole issue before this Court by virtue of Judge Walker's dissent is whether the majority of the panel in the Court of Appeals erred in that part of its opinion holding that the plaintiff was not entitled to summary judgment on defendants' counterclaim for violation of defendants' constitutional rights. For the reasons stated in the concurring and dissenting opinion of Judge Walker, we conclude that the majority did err in this regard, and accordingly, we reverse that part of the opinion of the majority below. Judge Walker concurred with the majority as to the other issues in its opinion in the Court of Appeals, and those issues are not before us. Therefore, as to those issues, the decision of the Court of Appeals remains in effect.

For the foregoing reasons, the decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed in part, and this case is remanded to that court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED.

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go to Learn About the Law