{
  "id": 1511304,
  "name": "GUILFORD FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC, Petitioner v. THE CITY OF BREVARD, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, RESPONDENT",
  "name_abbreviation": "Guilford Financial Services, LLC v. City of Brevard",
  "decision_date": "2003-02-28",
  "docket_number": "No. 295A02",
  "first_page": "655",
  "last_page": "656",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "356 N.C. 655"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "563 S.E.2d 27",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2002,
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "150 N.C. App. 1",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        9079654
      ],
      "year": 2002,
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/150/0001-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 130,
    "char_count": 1381,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.731,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.6988344922963238e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7004611079642095
    },
    "sha256": "faabfc807402506f3e69424daa2feca78adb6c0bbfb6a5166b9f6d9069f0088a",
    "simhash": "1:2859f68f7737fede",
    "word_count": 215
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:17:54.672071+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "GUILFORD FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC, Petitioner v. THE CITY OF BREVARD, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, RESPONDENT"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PER CURIAM.\nFor the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion, we reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals.\nREVERSED.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PER CURIAM."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Smith Moore LLP, by James G. Exum, Jr., and Robert R. Marcus; and Van Winkle, Buck, Wall, Starnes and Davis, P.A., by Craig D. Justus, for petitioner-appellant.",
      "Ramsey, Hill, Smart, Ramsey & Pratt, P.A., by Michael K. Pratt; and James M. Kimzey, for respondent-appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "GUILFORD FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC, Petitioner v. THE CITY OF BREVARD, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, RESPONDENT\nNo. 295A02\n(Filed 28 February 2003)\nZoning\u2014 subdivision plat \u2014 compliance with ordinance and regulations \u2014 entitlement to approval\nThe decision of the Court of Appeals in this case is reversed for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion that a subdivision plat for affordable housing complied with a city\u2019s zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations, the city council\u2019s denial of the subdivision application was unsupported by competent, material and substantial evidence, and the applicant was entitled to approval of its subdivision plat.\nAppeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. \u00a7 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 150 N.C. App. 1, 563 S.E.2d 27 (2002), vacating a judgment entered 2 November 2000 by Judge J. Marlene Hyatt in Superior Court, Transylvania County, and remanding the case with instructions. Heard in the Supreme Court 5 February 2003.\nSmith Moore LLP, by James G. Exum, Jr., and Robert R. Marcus; and Van Winkle, Buck, Wall, Starnes and Davis, P.A., by Craig D. Justus, for petitioner-appellant.\nRamsey, Hill, Smart, Ramsey & Pratt, P.A., by Michael K. Pratt; and James M. Kimzey, for respondent-appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0655-01",
  "first_page_order": 705,
  "last_page_order": 706
}