Any person who is aggrieved by a final decision of the Secretary of Transportation after exhausting all administrative remedies made available to him by rules and regulations enacted pursuant to this Article is entitled to judicial review of such decision under this Article. In order to obtain judicial review of the Secretary of Transportation's decision under this Article, the person seeking review must file a petition in the Superior Court of Wake County within 30 days after written copy of the decision of the Secretary of Transportation is served upon the person seeking review. Failure to file such a petition within the time stated shall operate as a waiver of the right of such person to review under this Chapter.
The petition shall state explicitly what exceptions are taken to the decision of the Secretary of Transportation and what relief petitioner seeks. Within 10 days after the petition is filed with the court, the person seeking the review shall serve copies of the petition by registered mail, return receipt requested, upon the Department of Transportation. Within 30 days after receipt of the copy of the petition for review, or within such additional time as the court may allow, the Department of Transportation shall transmit to the reviewing court a certified copy of the written decision.
At any time before or during the review proceeding, the aggrieved party may apply to the reviewing court for an order staying the operation of the decision of the Secretary of Transportation pending the outcome of the review. The court may grant or deny the stay in its discretion upon such terms as it deems proper. The review of the decision of the Secretary of Transportation under this Article shall be conducted by the court without a jury and shall hear the matter de novo pursuant to the rules of evidence as applied in the General Court of Justice. The court, after hearing the matter may affirm, reverse or modify the decision if the decision is:
(1) In violation of constitutional provisions; or
(2) Not made in accordance with this Article or rules or regulations promulgated by the Department of Transportation; or
(3) Affected by other error of law.
The party aggrieved shall have the burden of showing that the decision was violative of one of the above.
A party to the review proceedings, including the agency, may appeal to the appellate division from the final judgment of the Superior Court under the rules of procedure applicable in civil cases. The appealing party may apply to the Superior Court for a stay for its final determination or a stay of the administrative decision, whichever shall be appropriate, pending the outcome of the appeal to the appellate division. (1975, c. 568, s. 13; 1977, c. 464, ss. 32, 33.)
Notes of Decisions
Able Outdoor, Inc. v. Harrelson, 459 S.E.2d 626 (N.C. 1995).
· cites it 16× “The superior court gained jurisdiction of this case when Able petitioned for review of the final agency decision pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 136-134.1. N.C.G.S. § 6-19.1 provides in pertinent part: In any civil action .”
Appalachian Poster Advert. Co. v. Harrington, 366 S.E.2d 705 (N.C. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 5× “G.S. 136-134.1 provides in pertinent part: Any person who is aggrieved by a final decision of the Secretary of Transportation after exhausting all administrative remedies made available to him .”
Appalachian Poster Advert. Co., Inc. v. Harrington, 460 S.E.2d 887 (N.C. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 12× “0210(6) & (12)," promulgated by the Department pursuant to the OACA, provided that the district engineer shall revoke a sign permit for the rebuilding of a sign.”
Ace-Hi, Inc. v. Dep't of Transp., 319 S.E.2d 294 (N.C. Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 10× “1983), contains its own procedure for judicial review, codified at G.S. § 136-134.1 (1981). Under G.S. § 136-134.”
PNE AOA Media, L.L.C. v. Jackson Cnty., 554 S.E.2d 657 (N.C. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 4× “Under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 136-134.1 , PNE can file a petition for judicial review of the Secretary of Transportation’s determination that PNE’s sign was illegal.”
Capital Outdoor, Inc. v. Tolson, 582 S.E.2d 717 (N.C. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 4× “Pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 136-134.1 (2001), petitioners sought review in Wake County Superior Court.”
Powell v. North Carolina Dep't of Transp., 704 S.E.2d 547 (N.C. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 10× “” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 136-134.1 . Ill Petitioner also argues the revocation of his permit violated his due process rights.”
Freeland v. Greene, 235 S.E.2d 852 (N.C. Ct. App. 1977).
· cites it 5× “” Judicial review of final agency decision is provided for in G.S. 136-134.1, which contains the following: “G.”
Appalachian Poster Advert. Co. v. Bradshaw, 308 S.E.2d 764 (N.C. Ct. App. 1983).
· cites it 6× “Petitioner, pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 136-134.1 (1981), appealed the Secretary’s decision to the Wake County Superior Court.”
Nat'l Advert. Co. v. Bradshaw, 299 S.E.2d 817 (N.C. Ct. App. 1983).
· cites it 2× “The trial court heard this case pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 136-134.1 which reads in part: The review of the decision of the Secretary of Transportation under this Article shall be conducted by the court without a jury and shall hear the matter de novo pursuant to the rules of…”
Whiteco Metrocom, Inc. v. Roberson, 352 S.E.2d 277 (N.C. Ct. App. 1987).
“This final agency decision, judicially reviewed in a hearing de novo pursuant to G.S. 136-134.1, was also affirmed as a matter of law.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.