Title: Jamison v. Kyles

State: north-carolina

Issuer: North Carolina Supreme Court

Document:

157 S.E.2d 550 (1967) 271 N.C. 722 W. H. JAMISON, Superintendent of Building Inspection for the City of Charlotte, v. Mrs. H. F. KYLES. No. 284. Supreme Court of North Carolina. November 8, 1967. *552 Paul L. Whitfield, Charlotte, for plaintiff-appellant. No counsel contra. BRANCH, Justice. At the threshold of this appeal we are confronted with the question of whether the judge of superior court exceeded his certiorari powers of review in making findings of fact at variance with those found by the Board of Adjustment. G.S. § 143-315 provides: The findings of fact before the court were as follows: It is apparent that the court could only speculate as to what Paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 6 refer to. Thus, only findings of fact 4 and 5 of the Board are to be considered. *553 In re Appeal of Hasting, 252 N.C. 327, 113 S.E.2d 433, is a case which grew out of another Charlotte Zoning Board of Adjustment decision. In that case, under the zoning ordinance, petitioner was permitted to continue a nonconforming use when the ordinance was enacted. He later sought to get permission for additional construction upon contention that the construction was to complete facilities under his original plan. The Board affirmed the refusal of the building inspector to issue a permit to increase the use of the property. The decision of the Board was reviewed by the Superior Court, which sustained the Board's findings. In deciding this case on appeal from the Superior Court, this Court said: The case of Freeman v. Board of Alcoholic Control, 264 N.C. 320, 141 S.E.2d 499, again considered the authority of the Superior Court when reviewing proceedings of an administrative board. There the Court stated: Our examination of the competent evidence submitted to the Board discloses it to be sufficient to support its findings of fact. The court below erred in reversing these findings of fact. Neither did the trial court comply with the requirements of G.S. § 143-315 by setting out in writing the reasons for such reversal. Mrs. Kyles, appellee, has advised her attorneys in writing, copies of which are filed with the Court, that she does not desire to further pursue this appeal since she is moving to another State. Counsel did not appear or file brief in her behalf when the case was called for argument in this Court. Thus, the questions presented by this appeal have become moot. The judgment entered by the court below is vacated and the cause is remanded to Mecklenburg County Superior Court with direction to enter order dismissing Mrs. Kyles' appeal to the Superior Court of Mecklenburg County, as moot. Error and remanded.