Jennewein v. CITY COUNCIL OF CITY OF WILMINGTON

Court of Appeals of North Carolina
Jennewein v. CITY COUNCIL OF CITY OF WILMINGTON, 264 S.E.2d 802 (1980)
46 N.C. App. 324; 1980 N.C. App. LEXIS 2800
Parker, Morris, Wells

Jennewein v. CITY COUNCIL OF CITY OF WILMINGTON

Opinion

PARKER, Judge.

The order from which both petitioners and respondents have attempted to appeal is interlocutory. An appeal does not lie from an interlocutory order unless it affects some substantial right of the appellant and will work an injury to him if not corrected before an appeal from the final judgment. Industries, Inc. v. Insurance Co., 296 N.C. 486, 251 S.E. 2d 443 (1979); Veazey v. Durham, 231 N.C. 357, 57 S.E. 2d 377 (1950); Leak v. Covington, 95 N.C. 193 (1886); Auction Co. v. Myers, 40 N.C. App. 570, 253 S.E. 2d 362 (1979). The order in the present case remanded the case to the city council for hearing de novo. It did not affect a substantial right of either party which cannot be corrected upon appeal from final judgment without either party suffering injury in the meantime.

The attempted appeals are premature and are

Dismissed.

Chief Judge MORRIS and Judge WELLS concur.

Reference

Full Case Name
PAUL R. JENNEWEIN and Wipe, VIRGINIA N. JENNEWEIN, Petitioners v. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA, BEN B. HALTERMAN, MAYOR, J. D. CAUSEY, JOSEPH DUNN, MARGARET F. FONVIELLE, RALPH W. ROPER, WILLIAM SCHWARTZ, and J. RUPERT BRYAN, COUNCILPERSONS, Respondents
Cited By
6 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Appeal and Error 6.2 — application for special use permit — remand for hearing de novo — nonappealable order An order remanding the case to the Wilmington City Council for a hearing de novo upon petitioners' application for a special use permit was a nonappealable interlocutory order.