Huntley v. Potter

59 Citing cases

  1. Matheson v. City of Asheville

    102 N.C. App. 156 (N.C. Ct. App. 1991)   Cited 8 times
    Finding that City was not required to extend annexation boundaries to natural ridgelines where to do so would have defeated City's compliance with urbanization requirements

    For an annexation ordinance to be valid, the record must show prima facie "complete and substantial" compliance with Article 4A of N.C.G.S. 160A as a condition precedent to the municipality's right to annex the territory. In re Annexation Ordinance (Jacksonville), 255 N.C. 633, 122 S.E.2d 690 (1961); Huntley v. Potter, 255 N.C. 619, 122 S.E.2d 681 (1961). Once the municipality has made its prima facie showing of compliance, the burden shifts to petitioners to prove either a procedural irregularity in the annexation process materially prejudicing petitioners' rights or a failure on the part of the municipality to comply with statutory prerequisites to annexation as a matter of fact. Huntley v. Potter, 255 N.C. at 628, 122 S.E.2d at 686-87.

  2. In re E.D.H.

    381 N.C. 395 (N.C. 2022)   Cited 7 times

    [i]t is, as a general rule presumed that a public official properly and regularly discharges his duties, or performs acts required by law, in accordance with the law and the authority conferred on him, and that he will not do any act contrary to his official duty or omit to do anything which such duty may require. Huntley v. Potter , 255 N.C. 619, 628, 122 S.E.2d 681 (1961) (cleaned up). Thus, the burden is "on the party challenging the validity of public officials’ actions to overcome this presumption by competent and substantial evidence."

  3. In re Annexation Ordinance

    303 N.C. 220 (N.C. 1981)   Cited 22 times
    Considering and rejecting Fourteenth Amendment challenge to N.C. Gen.Stat. § 160A 45 et seq.

    The petitioners had the burden of showing by competent and substantial evidence a failure to meet statutory requirements or an irregularity in the proceedings which materially prejudiced their substantive rights. Food Town Stores v. City of Salisbury, 300 N.C. at 25, 265 S.E.2d at 126; Dunn v. City of Charlotte, 284 N.C. 542, 201 S.E.2d 873 (1974); In re Annexation Ordinance, 278 N.C. 641, 180 S.E.2d 851 (1971); Huntley v. Potter, 255 N.C. 619 122 S.E.2d 681 (1961). Petitioners have failed to carry that burden.

  4. McMillan v. Cumberland Cnty. Sch.

    No. 5:14-CV-344-D (E.D.N.C. Sep. 29, 2016)

    See, e.g., In re Annexation Ordinance No. 300-X, 304 N.C. 549, 551, 284 S.E.2d 470, 472 (1981); Huntley v. Potter, 255 N.C. 619, 628, 122 S.E.2d 681, 687 (1961). A party may overcome that presumption of good faith only with "competent and substantial evidence."

  5. Petersen v. Midgett

    140 F. Supp. 3d 490 (E.D.N.C. 2015)

    See, e.g., In re Annexation Ordinance No. 300–X, 304 N.C. 549, 551, 284 S.E.2d 470, 472 (1981); Huntley v. Potter, 255 N.C. 619, 628, 122 S.E.2d 681, 687 (1961). A party may overcome that presumption only with competent and substantial evidence.

  6. Petersen v. Midgett

    140 F. Supp. 3d 490 (E.D.N.C. 2015)

    See, e.g., In re Annexation Ordinance No. 300–X, 304 N.C. 549, 551, 284 S.E.2d 470, 472 (1981) ; Huntley v. Potter, 255 N.C. 619, 628, 122 S.E.2d 681, 687 (1961). A party may overcome that presumption only with competent and substantial evidence.

  7. Perry v. Pamlico Cnty.

    88 F. Supp. 3d 518 (E.D.N.C. 2015)   Cited 11 times

    See, e.g., In re Annexation Ordinance No. 300–X, 304 N.C. 549, 551, 284 S.E.2d 470, 472 (1981); Huntley v. Potter, 255 N.C. 619, 628, 122 S.E.2d 681, 687 (1961). A party may overcome that presumption only with competent and substantial evidence.

  8. Nolan v. Village of Marvin

    360 N.C. 256 (N.C. 2006)   Cited 9 times
    In Nolan, our Supreme Court explained: "Those part-time administrative services, such as zoning and tax collection, simply fill needs created by the annexation itself, without conferring significant benefits on the annexed property owners and residents."

    Municipalities receive their power to annex by delegation of legislative authority from the General Assembly. Huntley v. Potter , 255 N.C. 619, 627, 122 S.E.2d 681, 686 (1961) (Annexation of territory to a municipal corporation is a power conferred by the legislature and such power must be exercised " 'in strict accord with the statute conferring it.' "). Involuntary annexation is initiated by a municipality and is not subject to referendum; however, a municipality may involuntarily annex property only if the property meets strict geographical and developmental criteria set forth in N.C.G.S. § 160A-36 and the municipality follows the detailed procedures set forth in N.C.G.S. § 160A-35 and N.C.G.S. § 160A-37. These procedures include notice to the affected community, public meetings, verification that the property is eligible for annexation, and planning for the extension of existing public services to the area to be annexed.

  9. Leete v. County of Warren

    341 N.C. 116 (N.C. 1995)   Cited 24 times
    In Leete, a group of taxpayers filed an action to enjoin the Warren County Board of Commissioners from following through on its decision to pay the County Manager, who had voluntarily resigned after nine years of service, six weeks of severance pay totaling $5,073.12.

    [341 N.C. 119] It is well settled that absent evidence to the contrary, it will always be presumed "that public officials will discharge their duties in good faith and exercise their powers in accord with the spirit and purpose of the law." Huntley v. Potter, 255 N.C. 619, 628, 122 S.E.2d 681, 686-87 (1961); accord, Painter v. Wake County Board of Education, 288 N.C. 165, 178, 217 S.E.2d 650, 658 (1975). This presumption places a heavy burden on the party challenging the validity of public officials' actions to overcome this presumption by competent and substantial evidence.

  10. Thrash v. City of Asheville

    327 N.C. 251 (N.C. 1990)   Cited 16 times
    In Thrash v. Asheville, 327 N.C. 251, 393 S.E.2d 842 (1990), the Supreme Court disallowed an annexation based on a recorded plat map showing that the land in question was subdivided because no evidence existed of any lots or streets on the actual property.

    "Substantial compliance means compliance with the essential requirements of the Act." Huntley v. Potter, 255 N.C. 619, 627, 122 S.E.2d 681, 686 (1961). Municipalities seeking to annex new areas into their corporate limits are directed by N.C.G.S. 160A-54 to "use methods calculated to provide reasonably accurate results" in determining the degree of land subdivision for purposes of meeting the requirements of N.C.G.S. 160A-48.