Tucker v. Mecklenburg Cnty. Zoning Bd. of Adjustment, 576 S.E.2d 324 (N.C. 2003). · Go Syfert
Search
Tucker v. Mecklenburg Cnty. Zoning Bd. of Adjustment, 576 S.E.2d 324 (N.C. 2003). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
8 citation events (8 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
AMANDA DIXON TUCKER and JIMMY L. HODGES and BECKY J. HODGES
v.
THE MECKLENBURG COUNTY ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, MARSHALL GUS THOMAS, JR. and RHONDA GOLDEN-THOMAS
No. 68A02.
Supreme Court of North Carolina.
Feb 28, 2003.
576 S.E.2d 324
Kennedy Covington Lobdell & Hickman, L.L.P., by John H. Carmichael, for petitioner-appellants. , Ruff, Bond, Cobb, Wade & Bethune, L.L.P., by James O. Cobb, for respondent-appellee the Mecklenburg County Zoning Board of Adjustment. , Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, L.L.P., by Paul J. Osowski, for respondent-appellees Marshall Gus Thomas, Jr., and Rhonda Golden-Thomas.
Cited by 8 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

As to the issue on direct appeal based on the dissenting opinion, we affirm the majority decision of the Court of Appeals. We conclude that the petition for discretionary review as to additional issues was improvidently allowed.

AFFIRMED IN PART; DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IMPROVIDENTLY ALLOWED IN PART.