Case law

Wynn v. . Grant

166 N.C. 39 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 20, 1914

Grant, qualifying as his administratrix. The plaintiff, James O. Wynn, did not know that the amount of the note of the Welfleys, due 22 April, 1913, had been paid to F. … These propositions established therein are taken from the headnote, which states them with accuracy: 1.

State v. Blagg

Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 11, 2021

Regardless, Maxwell explicitly qualified his statement by noting that a seller might package methamphetamine in different quantities “depending on what the buyer is wanting. … ¶ 43 Finally, the majority’s analysis does not clearly identify the basis for its holding.

State v. Harden

344 N.C. 542 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 11, 1996

Accordingly, we need not address the question of whether defendant met his initial burden of showing discrimination and may proceed as if a prima facie case had been established. State v. … The evidence in this case clearly shows that defendant deliberately murdered two police officers for the purpose of evading a lawful arrest.

Emry v. Raleigh & Gaston Railroad

109 N.C. 589 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 15, 1891

as other Courts, and clearly founded upon reason. … The principle established in Gunter v.

State v. . Pollard

168 N.C. 116 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 21, 1914

True, the concluding portion of the statement would seem to qualify the position to some extent, but not sufficiently so to correct it, and in a case of this importance, and as the matter goes back for another hearing, we … Garland, supra, Justice Ashe , quoting from Hale, stated the rule strongly and clearly in S. v.

State v. Barfield

298 N.C. 306 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 6, 1979

Such evidence is clearly relevant in a prosecution for first-degree murder in that the state must prove a specific intent to kill if it is to win a conviction. State v. Wilson, 280 N.C. 674 , 187 S.E. 2d 22 (1972). … The evidence tends, therefore, to establish a motive for the crimes. Furthermore, the evidence tends to establish the existence of a continuing plan or scheme on the part of defendant.

State v. Cummings

326 N.C. 298 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 1, 1990

If so, the trial court committed error by failing to follow the six-prong test established by this Court in State v. … Since Karen’s statement was not made while she was perceiving the event, it would have to qualify as being made “immediately thereafter.”

Belmont Ass'n v. Farwig

Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 17, 2022

The Declaration established an Architectural Review Committee (ARC). … Indeed, counsel for defendants conceded at oral argument that a decision by the ARC does not qualify as a deed restriction, covenant, or similar binding agreement.

Willard v. Huffman

250 N.C. 396 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 12, 1959

“Assuming the above conclusions to have been established, petitioners still contend that the injunction in this case was inconsistent with the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution- of the United States, On the reasoning … To do ,so will, in effect, grant petitioners immunity from liability for their tortious conduct. We .see no substantial reason for reaching such a result.

State v. Smith

315 N.C. 76 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 10, 1985

Davis, the girls’ grandmother, to whom they first related the incident, clearly comes within the Rule 803(4) hearsay exception. … We also note that the girls’ statements to these volunteers were made after they had been examined and treated by qualified medical personnel.

State v. Hunt

357 N.C. 257 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 16, 2003

In North Carolina criminal prosecutions, the use of indictments is a well-established practice. … “The General Assembly has the undoubted right to enact legislation ... to modify old forms of bills of indictment[] or [to] establish new ones, provided the form established is sufficient to apprise the defendant with reasonable

State v. . Gant

201 N.C. 211 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 27, 1931

The court below clearly charged that the Surety Company is liable only the amount of the bond for each term, and further charged: "It is admitted, in this connection, gentlemen of the jury, that there were five bonds executed … Although the plaintiffs may establish that much indebtedness by Gant, they cannot recover of the bondsmen more than the face of the bond." Supply Co. v.

State v. Benner

Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 11, 2022

Because defendant was entitled to jury instructions that clearly established his right to self-defense “regardless of the character of the assault,” I would hold that the trial court prejudicially … Because the two instructions are clearly distinct, I would hold that the error was clearly prejudicial.

State v. Camacho

337 N.C. 224 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 29, 1994

This evidence clearly supports submission of murder by lying in wait to the jury. Defendant's evidence, however, tends to show he did not lie in wait for his victim. … The hammer, as used, easily qualifies as a deadly weapon. From this evidence the jury could reasonably infer that the killing was with malice, but not with premeditation and deliberation.

State ex rel. Utils. Comm'n v. Stein

Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 11, 2020

‘expenses’ deemed recoverable through [rates] then in effect that do not qualify for a return.” … As we have already noted, our prior decisions clearly indicate that N.C.G.S.

State Ex Rel. Andrews v. Chateau X, Inc.

296 N.C. 251 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 4, 1979

The Court, in dealing with the issue of freedom of the press repeatedly emphasized that "[t]hat liberty was especially cherished for the immunity it afforded from previous restraint of the publication of censure of public … All felt that the film was clearly a serious literary and artistic work. There was no testimony to the contrary.

State ex rel. Utils. Comm'n v. Stein

Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 11, 2020

‘expenses’ deemed recoverable through [rates] then in effect that do not qualify for a return.” … As we have already noted, our prior decisions clearly indicate that N.C.G.S.

State v. Boyd

343 N.C. 699 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 31, 1996

Warren then admitted that the legal import of “cool state of mind” was clearly not the same as the medical meaning, to which he was referring. … While the school record did establish that defendant dropped out of school in the ninth grade, we conclude that Dr.

Walser v. Jordan

124 N.C. 683 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 9, 1899

An examination of tbe constitutional history of tbe State I think will clearly show that the principles so clearly enunciated in Hoke v. … It then proe'eeds to hold that an officer has a qualified right of property in his office which the Courts will protect even against legislative interference.

Matter of Legg

337 N.C. 628 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 9, 1994

“If the Board relies on specific acts of misconduct to rebut this prima facie showing, and such acts are denied by the applicant, then the Board must establish the specific acts by the greater weight of the evidence.” … Therefore, the question of applicant’s knowledge of the outstanding bill was clearly before the Board in its earlier consideration of the application when it concluded conversion had occurred.