{
  "id": 8527994,
  "name": "WILLIAM CHARLES PALMER, Petitioner-Appellee v. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CRIME CONTROL & PUBLIC SAFETY, Respondent-Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Palmer v. North Carolina Department of Crime Control & Public Safety",
  "decision_date": "1991-02-05",
  "docket_number": "No. 9010SC50",
  "first_page": "572",
  "last_page": "573",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "101 N.C. App. 572"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Ct. App.",
    "id": 14983,
    "name": "North Carolina Court of Appeals"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "366 S.E.2d 604",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1988,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "89 N.C. App. 560",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8523867
      ],
      "year": 1988,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/89/0560-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 203,
    "char_count": 2461,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.741,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 3.6856254361847664e-07,
      "percentile": 0.8918365510884998
    },
    "sha256": "f780fa8c1c35bbe99fb199a92ffc8f7a1013b63bfaa4290bde2f3d3cbbd64c97",
    "simhash": "1:6f07038d052d2fce",
    "word_count": 374
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:54:53.681770+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges Johnson and Parker concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "WILLIAM CHARLES PALMER, Petitioner-Appellee v. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CRIME CONTROL & PUBLIC SAFETY, Respondent-Appellant"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PHILLIPS, Judge.\nFollowing proceedings through the proper administrative channels the State Personnel Commission affirmed the dismissal of petitioner from his employment with the North Carolina State Highway Patrol, but awarded him back pay for a certain period and costs, including attorneys fees, in the total amount of $8,037.03. Petitioner appealed the costs and attorneys fees award to the Superior Court of Wake County, which increased the allowance to $17,000. Respondent\u2019s appeal questions only the increase.\nRespondent contends that the court\u2019s modification of the award is erroneous because no findings of fact were made and the costs and fees allowed are excessive. Neither contention has merit. Under the express provisions of G.S. 126-41 the Commission\u2019s award of costs and attorneys fees was reviewable, the court had the authority to reverse or modify the award if found to be inadequate, and appellate tribunals with the authority to modify administrative decisions are not required to make findings of fact. Shepherd v. Consolidated Judicial Retirement System, 89 N.C. App. 560, 366 S.E.2d 604 (1988). In this instance the court determined that the Commission\u2019s award was inadequate and it is enough that the record, which contains an itemization of counsel\u2019s various services, supports that determination.\nAffirmed.\nJudges Johnson and Parker concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PHILLIPS, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Smith, Anderson, Blount, Dorsett, Mitchell & Jemigan, hy C. Ernest Simons, Jr., for petitioner appellee.",
      "Attorney General Lacy H. Thornburg, by Special Deputy Attorney General Isaac T. Avery, III, for respondent appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "WILLIAM CHARLES PALMER, Petitioner-Appellee v. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CRIME CONTROL & PUBLIC SAFETY, Respondent-Appellant\nNo. 9010SC50\n(Filed 5 February 1991)\nState \u00a7 12 (NCI3d)\u2014 State Personnel Commission \u2014 award of costs and attorneys fees \u2014 increased by trial court\nThe trial court did not err by modifying an award of costs and attorneys fees by the State Personnel Commission without findings of fact. The Commission\u2019s award of costs and attorneys fees was reviewable under N.C.G.S. \u00a7 126-41, and it is enough that the record, which contains an itemization of counsel\u2019s various services, supports the determination that the Commission\u2019s award was inadequate.\nAm Jur 2d, Costs \u00a7\u00a7 52, 78, 79, 94.\nAppeal by respondent from order entered 21 September 1989 by Judge James H. Pou Bailey in WAKE County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 28 August 1990.\nSmith, Anderson, Blount, Dorsett, Mitchell & Jemigan, hy C. Ernest Simons, Jr., for petitioner appellee.\nAttorney General Lacy H. Thornburg, by Special Deputy Attorney General Isaac T. Avery, III, for respondent appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0572-01",
  "first_page_order": 600,
  "last_page_order": 601
}