Case law

State v. Mills

184 N.C. 694 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 8, 1922

It is fully recognized that in the trial of causes the testimony of a witness may be impeached by evidence of his bad character, and it is equally well established that before this is allowed the impeaching witness must qualify … Among these, the rule which regulates the admission of testimony offered to impeach the character of a witness is now so well established and so clearly defined that a departure from it must be regarded as a violation of

Ford v. . Manning

152 N.C. 151 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 9, 1910

Even in matters pertaining to public roads, the statute clearly contemplates that in certain specified matters the board may act otherwise than at these two public meetings. … who were qualified and acting; and therefore, the two justices who made the order in the present case were the board of supervisors for Bethel Township, qualified and competent to perform the duties of such board.

Byrd v. Hudson

113 N.C. 203 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 15, 1893

The second exception was abandoned, and as to the third exception, the testimony of Stevens was clearly competent, as tending to prove malice. 13 Am. & Eng. Enc., 431, §4. 3. … Cheek, supra, which, like the present, vras a case of qualified privilege [13 Am. and Eng.

Nello L. Teer Co. v. North Carolina State Highway Commission

265 N.C. 1 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 23, 1965

It must be considered and construed in the context of well established legal principles stated below. Absent waiver, the State is immune from suit. Smith v. Hefner, 235 N.C. 1, 6 , 68 S.E. 2d 783 ; Ferrell v. … Clearly, it did not consider it was required to do so but that its function was comparable to that ordinarily performed by a board of arbitration.

State v. . Mills

184 N.C. 694 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 8, 1922

It is fully recognized that in the trial of causes the testimony of a witness may be impeached by evidence of his bad character, and it is equally well established that before this is allowed the impeaching witness must qualify … Among these, the rule which regulates the admission of testimony offered to impeach the character of a witness is now so well established and so clearly defined that a departure from it must be regarded as a violation of

State v. Taylor

298 N.C. 405 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 6, 1979

Finally, the district attorney stated that defendant had been cooperative in his interviews with police officers and “had related the details and the facts of the incidents under investigation very clearly to the officers … These were Virginia charges.” *415 “The immunity to unreasonable searches and seizures is a privilege personal to those whose rights thereunder have been infringed.

Ray v. Railroad

141 N.C. 84 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 10, 1906

clearly within the principle of the above decisions. … C., 252 , the court held that while one rightfully or by permission, as stated, on or dangerously near a railroad track is required to look and listen, this obligation may be so qualified by facts and attendant circumstances

Stone v. North Carolina Department of Labor

347 N.C. 473 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 6, 1998

Until the legislature clearly expresses that immunity is to be waived even in situations in which the common law public duty doctrine would otherwise apply to bar a negligence claim, we construe the Tort Claims Act as incorporating … Here, the duty to perform is clearly set out and can be accomplished. It is feasible.

In Re Means

176 N.C. 307 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 30, 1918

A substantial right, therefore, not to be forfeited of ignored except in some way o'r for some reason established or recognized by the law of the land.” … Even in case of proceedings pending, however, this is not'an absolute or arbitrary principle and may be departed from when it is clearly manifest that the good of the child requires it. This was recognized in Harris v.

State Ex Rel. Caldwell v. Wilson

121 N.C. 425 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 5, 1897

Wilson, or until your successor is elected and qualified according to law. 5th. … Missouri , 152 U.S. 377 , it was held that the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States protected by the Fourteenth Amendment are such privileges and immunities as arise out of the nature and essential character

Staton v. Norfolk & Carolina Railroad

111 N.C. 278 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 5, 1892

In the present case there was abundant testimony tending to show the existence of the qualifying conditions just stated, and the charge of his Honor in this respect is fully sustained by the principles declared in the decision … We are also of the opinion, as we have before stated, that had such immunity been expressly granted by statute, such legislation would have been in conflict with the Constitution, and therefore void. Affirmed.

Croom v. . Sugg

110 N.C. 259 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 5, 1892

.: The burden would have been upon the plaintiff to prove, if the fact had been denied, the allegations of his complaint that Fannie Sugg had made a will; that it had been duly proven, and that defendants had qualified as … The testimony being competent, his own declarations against his own interest were, as in all other cases, as clearly admissible as any other evidence to establish the truth of the alleged fact. May v.

Gilmer v. . Holton

98 N.C. 26 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 5, 1887

, when the defendant declined to qualify him. 5. … We are clearly of opinion that the appointment of the plaintiff was regular and proper, and warranted by law, and that he was entitled to take the oath of office before the defendant as clerk.

Nash v. . Tarboro

227 N.C. 283 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 9, 1947

The Session Laws of 1945, Chapter 413, purports to authorize the acquisition, or construction of the hotel, the issuance of the bonds, and the levy of the tax, provided the project be approved by a majority of the qualified … The reason municipal property is granted immunity from taxation is, that it is supposed to be dedicated to a public use."

State v. McLaughlin

321 N.C. 267 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 2, 1987

He admits in his brief, however, that “there was no evidence of a formal grant of immunity and order to testify.” … The jury thus was clearly instructed to consider the witnesses’ testimony in light of their possible bias.

Murray Co. v. . Broadway

176 N.C. 149 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 9, 1918

In these cases the written contracts were set aside for fraud, definitely alleged, clearly established, and promptly asserted, and it was held that the stipulations contained therein restrictive of the agent’s power to bind … To bold the contrary would be to sanction the principle tbat tbe deeper tbe guilt the greater tbe immunity, and enable fraud by its own contrivances to so entrench itself that its position would in many instances be practically

Carver v. Carver

310 N.C. 669 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 30, 1984

of an immunity which is personal to the agent. … Recovery here is not grounded on establishing the liability of the father who is neither a party defendant nor one through whom the liability of the defendant is sought to be established.

Trustees of Watts Hospital v. Board of Commissioners

231 N.C. 604 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 29, 1950

The findings of fact of the court make it manifest that drastic changes in conditions, which were entirely unforeseen at the time of the creation of the trusts, arose subsequent to the establishment of the trusts; that these … The corporate charter of the Trustees of Watts Hospital clearly discloses that the primary purpose motivating his gift of the hospital property to the Trustees was the establishment of a nonprofit hospital in Durham County

Shingleton v. State

260 N.C. 451 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 20, 1963

It does not qualify plaintiff’s right by use of such terms as “personally” or “in person.” The language of the grant is that “the said J. A. Shingleton is •hereby granted the right . . .” … The grant of easement was so- clearly connected with .tire conveyance of the 110-aore tract ¡that in tihe deed it follows immediately tihe description of the land.

Board of Commissioners v. Smith

110 N.C. 417 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 5, 1892

The town, having been thus treated as a party to the proceeding, very clearly had a right to have the action of the Board of Commissioners reviewed, and, as no appeal lies from that body in a case like the present, the writ … passing upon an application for license, and they have a right to take into consideration the question whether the demands of the public require an increase of such accommodations, and whether the place it is- proposed to establish