Case law

Roach v. City of Durham

204 N.C. 587 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 26, 1933

S. v. Moore, 113 N. C., 698 ; S. v. Vanhook, 182 N. C., 831 . … Gatlin v. Tarboro, 78 N. C., 119 ; Worth v. R. R., 89 N. C., 291 ; S. v. Williams, 158 N. C., 611 ; Tea Co. v. Doughton, 196 N. C., 145 ; Tea Co. v. Maxwell, 199 N. C., 433 .

Griggs v. . Sears, Roebuck Co.

218 N.C. 166 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 18, 1940

Brown v. Montgomery Ward & Co., 217 N. C., 368 , 8 S. E. (2d), 199 ; Schwingle v. Kellenberger, 217 N. C., 577 , 8 S. E. (2d), 918 ; Fox v. Tea Co., 209 N. C., 115 , 182 S. E., 662 ; Bowden v. Kress & Co., 198 N. … Brown v. Montgomery Ward & Co., supra; Schwingle v. Kellenberger, supra; Anderson v. Amusement Co., 213 N. C., 130 , 195 *169 S. E., 386; Parker v. Tea Co., 201 N. C., 691 , 161 S. E., 203 ; Bowden v. Kress, supra.

State v. . Dudley

182 N.C. 822 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 26, 1921

But if it be conceded that the board in question here, the Fisheries Commission Board, as a mere administrative board does not come within the exception stated, it is firmly established in this jurisdiction and fully recognized … Morgan v. Stewart, 144 N. C., 424 , citing S. v. Hay, 126 N. C., 999 ; Hutchins v. Durham, 137 N. C., 68 ; Morris v. Columbus, 102 Ga., 792 . And in Express Co. v. R. R., 111 N.

Idol v. Street

233 N.C. 730 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 7, 1951

Board of Health v. Comrs. of Nash, 220 N.C. 140 , 16 S.E. 2d 667 ; Sams v. Comrs. of Madison, 217 N.C. 284 , 7 S.E. 2d 540 . … Knopf, 183 Ill. 410 , 56 N.E. 155 ; Hildreth v. McEntire, 1 J. J. Marsh (Ky.) 206, 19 Am. D. 61 ; Board of Public Utilities v. New Orleans R. & Light Co., 145 La. 308 , 82 So. 280 ; People ex rel. Sinkler v.

Nance v. Western Union Telegraph Co.

177 N.C. 313 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 15, 1919

Co. v. Moffitt, 157 N. C., 568 ; Hendricks v. Ireland, 162 N. C., 523 ; Sigmon v. Shell, 165 N. C., 582 . And also to a demurrer in pleading. Caho v. R. R. Co., 147 N. C., 23 ; Hay v. Collins, 118 Ga., 243 ; Sloan v. S. … There was no special provision for better board or accommodations.

Walker v. . Burt

182 N.C. 325 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 2, 1921

Aydlett v. Brown, 153 N. C., 336 ; Cline v. Rudisill, 126 N. C., 524 ; Ore Co. v. Powers, 130 N. C., 153 ; Mercer v. Lamber Co., 173 N. C., 54 . … Brown v. Chemical Co., 165 N. C., 424 ; Lindsey v. Mitchell, 174 N. C., 459 ; Barcliff v. R. R., 176 N. C., 41 ; King v. R. R., ib., 306; Lipsitz v. Smith, 178 N. C., 100 ; Hill v. R. R., ib., 612; Starr v.

State Ex Rel. Brigman v. Baley

213 N.C. 119 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 2, 1938

The said commission shall serve as members of the equalization board and shall sit with the county commissioners as members of said equalization board, and the two boards shall constitute the equalization board of Madison … Groves v. Barden, 169 N. C., 8 , 84 S. E., 1042 ; S. v. Knight, ib., 333, 85 S. E., 418 ; Eliason v. Coleman, 86 N. C., 236 ; Clark v. Stanley, 66 N. C., 60 ; Worthy v. Barrett, 63 N. C., 199 ; U. S. v. Hartwell, 73 U.

Venable v. School Committee of Pilot Mountain

149 N.C. 120 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 19, 1908

County Board, at this term) or the committee is influenced by improper motives or there is misconduct on their part. Smith v. School Trustees, 141 N. C., 160 . … of $20 towards the purchase of the lot to be donated to the board created any interest invalidating the action of the board.

Holmes v. Bullock

178 N.C. 376 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 22, 1919

It acquired only the jurisdiction of the board of supervisors to determine whether a cartway should be established. McLaurin v. McIntyre; 167 N. C., 350 ; Boyett v. Vaughan, 85 N. C., 365 ; Ijames v. McClamrock, 92 N. … C., 365 ; Robeson v. Hodges, 105 N. C., 49 ; S. v. Wiseman, 131 N. C., 797 . The supervisors had no jurisdiction of proceedings for the laying out of a public road.

Chowan County v. . Commissioner of Banks

202 N.C. 672 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 27, 1932

The State Board of Assessment, “after careful consideration,” fixed the value for taxation at $19,375. In R. R. v. Lenoir County, 200 N. … R. v. Reid, 187 N. C., 320 ; R. R. v. Forbes, 188 N. C., 151 ; R. R. v. Cherokee County, 195 N. C., 756 .” Oliver v. Highway Commission, 194 N. C., 380 ; R. R. v. Cherokee County, 194 N. C., 781 .

Duke v. State ex rel. Shaw

247 N.C. 236 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 27, 1957

Stedman v. Winston-Salem, 204 N.C. 203 , *239 167 S.E. 813 ; Powell v. Maxwell, 210 N.C. 211 , 186 S.E. 326 ; Hinson v. Lott, 8 Wall 148, 19 L. ed. 387; Ward v. Maryland, 12 Wall 418, 20 L. ed. 449. … Board of State Tax Comrs., 184 N.C. 499, 115 , S.E. 336; Goldsmith v. United States Board of Tax Appeals, 270 U.S. 117 , 70 L. ed. 494; 42 Am. Jur. 590 .

Chrismon v. Guilford County

322 N.C. 611 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 28, 1988

See, e.g., Hartnett v. Austin, 93 So. 2d 86 (Fla. 1956); V. F. Zahodiakin Eng’r Corp. v. Zoning Board of Adjustment, 8 N.J. 386 , 86 A. 2d 127 (1952). … See also Tennison v. Shomette, 38 Md. App. 1 , 379 A. 2d 187 (1977); Save Our Rural Environment v.

Gardner v. City of Reidsville

269 N.C. 581 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 8, 1967

See also State v. Dixon, 215 N.C. 161 , 1 S.E.2d 521 ; Sams v. Board of Com'rs., 217 N.C. 284 , 7 S.E.2d 540 ; Carolina-Virginia Coastal Highway v. Coastal Turnpike Authority, 237 N.C. 52 , 74 S.E.2d 310 . … G.S. § 18-39 provides: "Powers and authority of Board.

Doe on the Demise of Gibson v. Gibson

49 N.C. 425 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 5, 1857

Davidson v. Davidson, 1 Hawks Rep. 161 ; Brown v. Brown, 8 Ire. Rep. 134 ; Long v. Norcom, 4 Ire.

Faircloth v. . Kenlaw

165 N.C. 228 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 1, 1914

Galvin v. Prentice, 145 N. Y., 162 , citing King v. Brown, 2 Hill, 481 ; Lockwood v. … Albea v. Griffin, 22 N. C., 9 ; Hedgepeth v. Rose, 95 N. C., 41 ; Tucher v. Markland, 101 N. C., 422 ; Vick v. Vick, 126 N. C., 123 .

Lee v. Walker

234 N.C. 687 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 1, 1952

Kennedy v. Williams, 87 N.C. 6 ; Stewart v. Frink, 94 N.C. 487 ; S. v. Long, 94 N.C. 896 ; S. v. Fisher, 117 N.C. 733 , 23 S.E. 158 ; Sugg v. Greenville, supra; Wittson v. Dowling, supra; Irwin v. Charlotte, supra; R. … In Mebane v.

Winstead v. Hearne Bros.

173 N.C. 606 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 26, 1917

BROWN, J. … There seems to have been no distinct meeting of the board of directors, but there seems to have been annual meetings of the stoekholdprs.

Crawley v. . Stearns

194 N.C. 15 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 10, 1927

Brown and Alice E. … The principle is stated with like clearness by Brown, J., in Weeks v. Wilkins, 139 N.

Lamb v. . Smith

215 N.C. 463 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 19, 1939

As was said in Brown v. Williams, 196 N. … Dodson v. McAdams, 96 N. C., 149 ; Avitt v. Smith, 120 N. C., 392 .” We think the Brown case, supra, similar to the present action. In the judgment we can see no error. Affirmed.

Edgerton v. . Kirby

156 N.C. 347 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 18, 1911

Attorney-General v. Justices of Guilford, 27 N. C., 315 ; Barnes v. Commissioners, 135 N. C., 27 . If W. A. Green was not elected, tbe six members of tbe board must meet and elect a successor to W. A. … Green, and in other respects proceed with tbe business of the board. “A mandamus lies only for one who has a specific legal right, and who is without any other adequate legal remedy.” 1 Chitty Gen. Pr., 790; S. v.