Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Appeal of and Petition for Judicial Review

Filed: November 6, 1979.

IN RE: APPEAL OF AND PETITION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW BY ARCADIA DAIRY FARMS, INC. OF REGULATION 4 NCAC 7.0505, RULES OF CLASSIFICATION OF THE NORTH CAROLINA MILK COMMISSION AS AMENDED, NOVEMBER 10, 1977


Appeal by respondent from Godwin, Judge. Order entered 20 November 1978 in Superior Court, Wake County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 20 September 1979.

Erwin, Judge. Judges Vaughn and Hill concur.

Erwin

The Commission contends that the trial court erred by failing to make any findings of fact in its order to support its conclusions of law. We do not agree.

G.S. 150A-51 provides in part: "If the court reverses or modifies the decision of the agency, the judge shall set out in

writing, which writing shall become a part of the record, the reasons for such reversal or modification." When the judge of the Superior Court sits as an appellate court to review the decision of an administrative agency pursuant to G.S. 150A-50, the judge is not required to make findings of fact and enter a judgment thereon in the same sense as a trial judge pursuant to G.S. 1A-1, Rule 52(a), of the Rules of Civil Procedure. Markham v. Swails, 29 N.C. App. 205, 223 S.E.2d 920, dis. rev. denied, 290 N.C. 309, 225 S.E.2d 829, cert. denied, 290 N.C. 551, 226 S.E.2d 510, 429 U.S. 940, 50 L. Ed. 2d 310, 97 S. Ct. 356 (1976). The trial court reviewed the "whole record" which is the proper standard of judicial review as required by G.S. 150A-51. Thompson v. Board of Education, 292 N.C. 406, 233 S.E.2d 538 (1977). The order of Judge Godwin was fully adequate to comply with the statute and the case law of our State. We find no merit in this assignment of error.

In the other assignment of error, the Commission contends that the trial court erred in concluding:

"(a) That N.C.G.S. 106-266.8 violates:

(1) Article I -- Section 1, 19, 32, 34; Article II -- Section I; and Article V -- Sections 2(1), 2(2), 5 of the Constitution of North Carolina, and

(2) Article I -- Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution of the United States; and

(b) That 4 NCAC 7.0505 violates:

(1) Article I -- Sections 1, 8, 19, 32, 34; and Article V -- Sections 2(1-2), 5; and

(2) Article I -- Section 8, Clause 3 and 14th Amendment of the Constitution ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.