Case law

Bowen v. . Daugherty

168 N.C. 242 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 17, 1915

J., concurring; BROWN, J., did not sit or participate in the decision of this case. … Kitty Brown (one of the claimants) for life, and after her death to the children of Mrs. Kitty Brown, and appointed Mrs. Kitty Brown executrix, and that the said Mrs.

In the Matter of Assessment Against R. R.

196 N.C. 756 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 20, 1929

It was passed by the board that a street on each side of the railroad bed 45 feet from centre, be established, beginning at the Danville crossing and running to the Gates crossing. … Brown , 165 N.C. 435 , is not in conflict with position here taken.

Mauney v. . Commissioners

71 N.C. 491 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 5, 1874

Garsed v. City of Greensboro

126 N.C. 159 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 13, 1900

The City of Greensboro in its answer, it is true, declared that it never had any intention of advancing any money to the dispensary board for the purposes of the act, and expressly disclaimed any intention to do so; but in … Cited: S. v. Smith, post , 1058; S. v. Newcomb, post , 1105. (166)

Carolina Power & Light Co. v. Bowman

228 N.C. 319 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 10, 1947

Board of Agriculture v. Drainage District, 177 N. C., 222 , 98 S. E., 597 . It seems to be intimated, though not quite said, in the majority opinion that the statute applies only to conventional easements. … The fate of this last paragraph recalls Justice Brown’s quotation in Kornegay v. Goldsboro, 180 N. C., 441 , 105 S.

Patrick v. . Insurance Co.

176 N.C. 660 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 11, 1918

Ragan, was for many years a member of the board of commissioners of the county and its chairman for seven years. … Gudger v. White , 141 N.C. 507 ; Triplett v. Williams , 149 N.C. 394 ; Beacon v. Amos , 161 N.C. 357 ; Brown v. Brown , 168 N.C. 4 ; Mining Co. v. Lumber Co. , 170 N.C. 273 .

Michaux v. City of Rooky Mount

193 N.C. 550 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 13, 1927

Fitzgerald v. Concord, 140 N. C., 110 ; Bailey v. Winston, 157 N. C., 253 ; Smith v. Winston, 162 N. C., 50 ; Foster v. Tryon, 169 N. C., 182 ; Sehorn v. Charlotte, 171 N. C., 540 ; Dowell v. Raleigh, 173 N. … Brown v. Louisburg, 126 N. C., 701 ; Kinsey v. Kinston, 145 N. C., 106 ; Seagraves v. Winston, 170 N. C., 618 ; Hardy v. Construction Co., 174 N. C., 320 .

Richardson v. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION

610 S.E.2d 205 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 3, 2005

State v. Bailey

307 N.C. 110 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 3, 1982

State v. Sneeden, supra; State v. Johnson, supra; State v. Adkins, 194 N.C. 749 , 140 S.E. 806 (1927); State v. Burton, 172 N.C. 939 , 90 S.E. 561 (1916); Gaither v. Generator Co., 121 N.C. 384 , 28 S.E. 546 (1897). … In State v.

State v. . Randall

170 N.C. 757 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 15, 1915

McIntosh brought these two kegs of whiskey and set it down on the porch, and Lawson Randall (defendant), said, “That is Brown’s whiskey,” and his wife said, “What Brown?” … When defendant said, “That is Brown’s whiskey,” his wife said, “What Brown?” He said, “The Brown downstairs.” She replied, “You know there isn’t any Brown here.

In Re Mitchell

220 N.C. 65 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 24, 1941

It is conceded tbat Brown & Crawley is a copartnership founded in 1926 and is “exclusively engaged in tbe meat packing industry and in tbe wholesale processing and distribution of meat products”; tbat Brown & Crawley Oil … These admitted facts make Unemployment Compensation Commission v. Coal Co., 216 N. C., 6 , 3 S. E. (2d), 290 , and Unemployment Compensation Commission v. Willis, 219 N.

Bartlett v. Hopkins

235 N.C. 165 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 27, 1952

Cherry v. Andrews, 229 N.C. 333 , 49 S.E. 2d 641 ; Chesson v. Container Co., 223 N.C. 378 , 26 S.E. 2d 904 ; Brown v. Broadhurst, 197 S.E. 738 , 150 S.E. 355 ; Brown v. … G.S. 1-195; Brown v. Clement Co., supra; Booker v. Highlands, supra; Wilson v. Featherstone, 120 N.C. 446 , 27 S.E. 124 . 3.

State v. Baker

336 N.C. 58 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 8, 1994

State v. Brown, 310 N.C. 563 , 313 S.E.2d 585 (1984). All reasonable inferences based upon the evidence are to be indulged in. Id. . . . … State v. Pridgen, 313 N.C. 80 , 326 S.E.2d 618 (1985); State v. Jones, 303 N.C. 500 , 279 S.E.2d 835 (1981). State v. Reese, 319 N.C. 110, 138-39 , 353 S.E.2d 352, 368 (1987). In State v.

Steel Co. v. . Edwards

110 N.C. 353 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 5, 1892

Brown and John J. Donaldson, by their attorney William J. Brown, conveyed to John T. … Cited: S. c. , 111 N.C. 500 ; Bernhardt v. Brown , 122 N.C. 590 ; Wyman v. Taylor , 124 N.C. 430 ; Batts v. Batts , 128 N.C. 22 .

Den on the Several Demises of Robinson v. Barfield

6 N.C. 391 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 5, 1818

the said Sarah Brown, and so as to bar them and (419) every of them forever." … University v. Foy , 3 N.C. 310 , 374 ; Allen v. Peden , 4 N.C. 442 . Divers cases have been decided the same way in the Supreme Court of the United States, which, we think, ought to put the question at rest. *Page 291

State v. Stanton

319 N.C. 180 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 4, 1987

Brown’s apartment. … In State v.

Huff v. Norfolk Southern Railroad

171 N.C. 203 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 22, 1916

R., 36 Wisc., 495; Bowie v. Birmingham Ry., 125 Ala., 397 ; Vedder v. Fellows, 20 N. Y., 126 ; Brown v. Memphis R. R., 7 Fed., 51; and has been fully recognized in our own State in Britton v. R. R., 88 N. C., 536 . … The owners of a railroad have put him in charge of the persons and property on board its cars.

State v. . Hill

126 N.C. 1140 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 14, 1900

Even then he had no assurance of obtaining it, no matter how low he bid, as the board of health retained the right to refuse any and all bids, and to "decide who are competent (1144) bidders." … Attorney-General and Brown Shepherd for State; Osborne, Maxwell Keerans for defendant. GARREN v. SCOTT, from Henderson. Affirmed . W. A. Smith and A. E. Posey for plaintiff; no counsel for defendant. BAXTER v.

Edwards v. City of Raleigh

150 N.C. 276 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 17, 1909

Brown, J. The evidence, taken in the most favorable light for the plaintiff, establishes these facts: On 23 November, 1907, about 7 P. … In the case of Smith v.

State Ex Rel. Thornburg v. House and Lot

334 N.C. 290 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 30, 1993

Rogister, Jr. and Allison Brown Schafer, Raleigh, for the North Carolina School Boards Ass'n, amicus curiae. Randle L. Jones, High Point, for The North Carolina Ass'n of Police Attys.; Charles P. … In Mussallam v.