green
Positive treatment
3.7 score
Treatment trajectory · 1994 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1994
2010
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Beaufort County Board of Education v. Beaufort County Board of Commissioners
(2×)
See Capital Outdoor Advertising v. City of Raleigh, 337 N.C. 150, 154 , 446 S.E.2d 289, 292, n.1,2 (1994), rehearing denied, 337 N.C. 807 , 449 S.E.2d 566 .
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Chisholm
See Phelps v. Phelps, 337 N.C. 344, 350 , 446 S.E.2d 17, 20 , reh’g denied, 337 N.C. 807 , 449 S.E.2d 750 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Sammartino
(2×)
See Capital Outdoor Advertising v. City of Raleigh, 337 N.C. 150 , 154 n.1-2, 446 S.E.2d 289 , 291-92 n.1-2, reh’g denied, 337 N.C. 807 , 449 S.E.2d 566 (1994).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
CAPITAL OUTDOOR ADVERTISING, INC., Carolina Posters Corporation, Harris Signs, Inc., Hogan Outdoor of Raleigh, Inc., and Whiteco Industries, Inc., t/a Whiteco Metrocom, Inc.
v.
The CITY OF RALEIGH, a North Carolina Municipal Corporation.
v.
The CITY OF RALEIGH, a North Carolina Municipal Corporation.
136PA93.
Supreme Court of North Carolina.
Oct 5, 1994.
Published
Ira J. Botvinick, Deputy City Atty., Thomas A. McCormick, City Atty., for City of Raleigh.
Betty S. Waller, Brian E. Upchurch, Raleigh, for Capital Outdoor, et al.
Prior report: 337 N.C. 150, 446 S.E.2d 289.
ORDER
Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff in this matter for rehearing of the decision of this Court pursuant to Rule 31, N.C.Rules of Appellate Procedure, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:
"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th day of October 1994."