Case law

Rogers v. . Clements

92 N.C. 81 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 5, 1885

This declaration was admitted to show non-payment by that obligor, it being necessary to prove non-payment by both in order to remove the presumption as to each under the ruling in Campbell v. Brown, 86 N. … The separate acknowledgment of one debtor *86 that he has not paid the debt is insufficient to charge him even, unless it is also shown that none of the others had made payment In Campbell v. Brown, 86 N.

Comrs. of Brunswick v. . Inman

203 N.C. 542 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 23, 1932

Fidelity Co. v. Fleming , 132 N.C. 332 , 43 S.E. 899 . … Realty Co. v. Charlotte , 198 N.C. 564 , 152 S.E. 686 . There is no error in the judgment that the plaintiffs respectively recover of the defendant, Robert F.

Skinner v. . Bland

87 N.C. 168 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 5, 1882

His Honor’s ruling is in itself manifestly correct, and is. fully, supported by the authority of Isler v. Brown, 69 N. C., 125 , and for the very reasons assigned by him. There is no error. No error. Affirmed.

State v. . Gragg

122 N.C. 1082 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 26, 1898

State v. Green, 117 N. C., 695 ; Young v. Alford, 118 N. C., 215 ; State v. Kiger, 115 N. C., 746 ; State v. Chancy, 110 N. C., 507 ; State v. Christmas, 101 N. C., 749 ; State v. Powell, 94 N. C., 965 ; State v. … C., 519 ; State v. White, 89 N. C., 462 ; Brown v. Kinsey, 81 N. C., 245 ; State v. Waller, 80 N. C., 401 ; State v. Patterson, 78 N. C., 470 ; State v. Allen, 48 N. C., 257 ; Sutton v. Madre, 47 N. C., 320 ; Cobb v.

State Ex Rel. Lippard v. Roseman

70 N.C. 34 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 5, 1874

The facts of this case do not materially differ 'from those stated in the opinion of the Court in the preceding case of Armfield v. … Brown. *35 As we there held that ch. §9, sec. 2, of the acts of 1866-’67 by virtue of which, a trial 'by jury was demanded, had been .repealed, that case is decisive of this and for the reasons there ■stated, the judgment

Parks v. . Commissioners

186 N.C. 490 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 21, 1923

McIntire v. R. R. , 67 N.C. 278 . See S. v. Lyle , 100 N.C. 503 ; R. R. v. McCaskill , 94 N.C. 746 ; Allen v. R. R. , 102 N.C. 381 . … Greenville , 154 N.C. 490 ; Rosenthal v. Goldsboro , 149 N.C. 128 ; Small v. Edenton , 146 N.C. 527 ; Ward v. Comrs. , 146 N.C. 534 ; Durham v. Rigsbee , 141 N.C. 128 ; Tate v. Greensboro , 114 N.C. 392 ; Brodnax v.

Rayfield v. Clark

283 N.C. 362 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 9, 1973

Kelly v. Harvester Co., 278 N.C. 153 , 179 S.E. 2d 396 (1971). … Brown v. Brown, 264 N.C. 485, 488 , 141 S.E. 2d 875, 877 (1965).

State v. Philip Morris USA Inc.

359 N.C. 763 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Aug 19, 2005

See Register v. White, 358 N.C. 691, 693 , 599 S.E.2d 549, 552 (2004). … United States v. Gonzales, 520 U.S. 1, 4 , 137 L. Ed. 2d 132, 138 (1997) (noting judicial analysis of a statute always begins with “the statutory text”); Knicklebine v. Pensacola, 1988 U.S. Dist.

Pridgen v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad

203 N.C. 62 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 15, 1932

Brown v. R. R., 202 N. C., 256; Phifer v. Berry, 202 N. C., 388. … The standards prescribed for determining whether the proposed newly discovered evidence will warrant a new trial are contained in Brown v. Sheets, 197 N. C., 268 , 148 S. E., 233 .

Wearn v. North Carolina Railroad

191 N.C. 575 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 14, 1926

R. v. Olive, 142 N. C., 257 ; Earnhardt v. R. R., 157 N. C., 358 ; Hendrix v. R. R., 162 N. C., 9 ; R. R. v. Bunting, 168 N. C., 580 ; Tighe v. R. R., 176 N. C., 239 . … Carter v. White, 101 N. C., 30 ; Cox v. McGowan, 116 N. C., 131 ; Potter v. Bonner, 174 N. C., 20 .

White v. . Comrs. of Johnston

217 N.C. 329 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 27, 1940

Person v. Doughton, 186 N. C., 723 , 120 S. E., 481 ; Martin v. Clark, 135 N. C., 178 , 47 S. E., 397 ; Wilkinson v. Board of Education, 199 N. C., 669 , 153 S. E., 163 ; Powers v. Asheville, 203 N. C., 2 , 164 S. … E., 882 ; Mears v. Board of Education, 214 N. C., 89 , 197 S. E., 752 . Admitting the facts alleged in the present action, which we must do in testing the sufficiency of the complaint challenged by demurrer, Ins. Co. v.

Clark v. . McQueen

195 N.C. 714 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 6, 1928

The only question presented by this appeal is .whether the board of education of a county, in this State, has the power, in the exercise of its discretion, to discontinue a high school, theretofore established by said board … The principle stated and applied in deciding the question presented by the appeal in Newton v. School Committee, 158 N. C., 187 is well settled.

Parish v. East Coast Cedar Co.

133 N.C. 478 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 24, 1903

This act is apparently intended, at least by the draftsman, to evade the construction placed upon the old act by the eases of Phelps v. Chesson, 34 N. C., 194 , and Land Co. v. Board of Education, 101 N. C., 35 . … In Land Co. v. Board of Education, 101 N.

Nebel v. Nebel

223 N.C. 676 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 15, 1943

See also Moore v. Moore, 11 N. C., 358 , 15 Am. Dec., 523 ; Bunker v. Llewellyn, 221 N. C., 1 , 18 S. E. (2d), 717 . The principle here stated is differentiated from that applied in Godfrey v. … J., in Sugg v. Credit Corp., 196 N. C., 97 , 144 S. E., 554 .

Snipes v. City of Winston

126 N.C. 374 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 17, 1900

Tbe plaintiff was interested in obtaining the best possible contract from himself and his associates on the Board. … Smith v. Albany, 61 N. Y., 444 , is a case in point.

Gallimore v. STATE HIGHWAY AND PUBLIC WORKS COM'N

241 N.C. 350 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 14, 1955

Abernathy v. South & W. R. Co., supra. Hence, evidence as to noise and smoke, etc., as in Carolina & Y. R. R. v. Armfield, 167 N.C. 464 , 83 S.E. 809 , injury to a spring, as in Brown v. W. T. … Brown v. Power Co., supra; Nantahala Power & Light Co. v. Moss, supra.

Peters v. Pasquotank Highway Commission

184 N.C. 30 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 13, 1922

Luke xii, v. 14. … To the same effect, Davenport v. Board of Education, 183 N. C., 570 .

Blevins v. Town of West Jefferson

361 N.C. 578 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 12, 2007

In Re May Budget of the Board of Education

187 N.C. 710 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 14, 1924

A majority of the members of each board shall cast the vote for each board. … Following the case of Board of Education v. Comrs., 182 N.

Lawrence v. . Comrs. of Hertford

210 N.C. 352 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 30, 1936

The question presented in Martin v. … Smith v. Shawnee County , 132 Kan. 233 , 294 P. 915 ; Wilson v. Sawyer , 177 Ark. 492 , 6 S.W.2d 825 , and Surrance v. Donna , 248 N.Y. 18 , 161 N.E. 315 .