Today’s NC Supreme Court opinions included several that may have a direct effect on the direction, interpretation and implementation of administrative law in NC.
The Communications Committee asks for your help in this regard. We are looking for authors for blog posts that highlight the impacts of the three cases listed below, each of which includes a dissent. If you are willing to write such an article (pros-cons articles are also welcome), please contact one of the members of the committee: Ann Wall, Chair, Nick Dowgul, Michael Byrne.
Cabarrus Cty. Bd. of Educ. v. Dep’t of State Treasurer, (369PA18 – Published) Author: Justice Sam Ervin IV. Whether the General Assembly intended to exempt by implication the Teachers’ and State Employees’ Retirement System’s Board of Trustees from rulemaking requirements pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, N.C.G.S. 150B, in adopting a Contribution-Based Benefit Cap pursuant to N.C.G.S. 135-5(a3).
Whether payments made pursuant to an agreement between the Attorney General’s Office and major hog producers constitute ‘penalties’ subject to article IX, section 7 of the North Carolina Constitution.
PHG Asheville, LLC v. City of Asheville, (434PA18 – Published) Author: Justice Sam Ervin IV. Conditional Use Permits; Whether the City of Asheville properly denied a developer’s application for a conditional use permit to build a hotel in downtown Asheville; Whether a local government may independently assess an application for a conditional use permit and make findings of fact that support denying that permit when no one offers evidence in opposition to that permit or, alternatively, whether a developer is automatically entitled to the issuance of a conditional use permit when no one presents evidence in opposition to the permit.