Split N.C. Appeals Court favors Lumberton in sweepstakes licensing dispute

N.C. Appeals Court judges split 2-1 this morning in affirming a trial-court ruling favoring Lumberton in its dispute with Internet sweepstakes parlors over privilege license charges. The city enacted a privilege license tax in 2010 that amounts to $5,000 per business location, plus $2,500 per machine.

In other opinions released this morning:

• A unnaimous three-judge panel affirmed a trial-court ruling favoring Orange County in its dispute with county seat Hillsborough over permitting for the expanded county Justice Center.
• A unanimous three-judge panel affirmed a trial-court ruling this morning against the N.C. Revenue Department in a dispute involve sales tax liability for a company that sells and leases office equipment.
• A unanimous three-judge panel affirmed the N.C. Industrial Commission’s ruling favoring N.C. State University’s veterinary teaching hospital in a dispute involving a Jack Russell terrier that died in 2007 while under the hospital’s care.
• A unanimous three-judge panel reversed a trial-court ruling and ruled against Nags Head in its efforts to seize a property and demolish a home as a public nuisance. Judge Donna Stroud’s opinion includes the following:

This is not a case involving access to the shoreline across private property, protecting property which has already been determined to be a public trust area, or a myriad of other such similar situations; this is a case where a governmental agency is attempting to take private property from an individual, destroy the Dwelling, and claim the land on the basis that it currently lies within a public trust area. Plaintiff’s analogy regarding the presence of a house in the middle of a highway is not accurate, as in this case the house was already lawfully constructed on its current location prior to the plaintiff’s assertion of public trust rights. If a house were lawfully constructed and then the State decided to construct a highway through the middle of the house, the State would first have to condemn the property and pay just compensation to the landowner.