All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the North Carolina Reports and North Carolina Court of Appeals Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the electronic version of an opinion and the print version appearing in the North Carolina Reports and North Carolina Court of Appeals Reports, the latest print version is to be considered authoritative.

ALICE MONROE NELSON, LINDA L. MONROE, R.B. MONROE KELLY, JULIAN D. KELLY, JR., MOYNA MONROE, ALICE BLANC MONROE NELSON and husband L. KENT NELSON, BUNROTHA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, KATALANTA CORP., KATHRYN B. HEDRICKS, SUSAN B. INMAN, SAMUEL N. EVINS, JR., WALTER P. EVINS, MARGARET EARLY, MARY PRESSLEY, SIDNEY McCARTY, III, MILDRED JOHNSON, JOHN HENRY CHEATHAM, Trustee of the Liela Barnes Cheatham North Carolina Residence Trust v. TOWN OF HIGHLANDS, a Municipal Corporation

--------

MICHAEL WENTZ v. TOWN OF HIGHLANDS, a Municipal Corporation

No. 478A03

FILED: 2 APRIL 2004


Eminent Domain_condemnation by town_owners' right to pursue injunctive relief

    The decision by the Court of Appeals that plaintiff landowners had no right to institute an action for injunctive relief to prohibit defendant town from proceeding with the condemnation of their property because plaintiffs had an adequate remedy at law through the condemnation proceeding is reversed for the reason stated in the dissenting opinion that the legislature, in revising the eminent domain statutes by N.C.G.S. Ch. 40A, intended to preserve the rights of all parties to pursue injunctive relief.

    Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 159 N.C. App. 393, 583 S.E.2d 313 (2003), affirming orders entered 15 January 2002 by Judge James U. Downs in Superior Court, Macon County. Heard in the Supreme Court 18 February 2004.
    Adams Hendon Carson Crow & Saenger, P.A., by Martin Reidinger, for plaintiff- appellants.

    Coward, Hicks & Siler, P.A., by William H. Coward, for defendant-appellant.

    
    PER CURIAM.

    For the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion, the decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed and this case is remanded to that court for further remand to the Superior Court, Macon County, for proceedings not inconsistent with the dissenting opinion.    REVERSED AND REMANDED.
    Justice MARTIN did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

*** Converted from WordPerfect ***