Case law

Mangum v. Durham Loan & Trust Co.

195 N.C. 469 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 11, 1928

Patterson v. McCormick, 181 N. C., 311 ; Pilley v. Sullivan, 182 N. C., 493 ; Walker v. Trollinger, 192 N. C., 744 ; Williams v. Best, ante, 324; Brown v. Brown, ante, 315. … See Powell v. Wood, 149 N. C., p. 235; Austin v. Austin, 160 N. C., 367 ; Kidder v. Bailey, 187 N. C., 505 .

Hoyle v. City of Hickory

167 N.C. 619 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 16, 1914

Meares v. Wilmington, 31 N. C., 73 ; Salisbury v. R. R., 91 N. C., 490 ; Wright v. Wilmington, 92 N. C., 160 ; Tate v. Greensboro, 114 N. C., 397.; Brown v. Electric Co., 138 N. C., 537 ; Ward v. Comrs., 146 N. … Brown v. Electric Co., 138 N. C., 537 ; Foy v. Winston, 126 N. C., 381 ; Norfolk v. Philadelphia, 16 A. and E. Anno. Cases, 430, and note.

SANDHILL AMUSEMENTS, INC. v. State

365 N.C. 333 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Aug 25, 2011

.; and Old North State Amusements, Inc. v. … Browning, Smithfield, for State of N.C, et al. Kelly Daughtry, for Sandhill Amusements, Inc., et al.

Vance S. Harrington & Co. v. Renner

236 N.C. 321 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 29, 1952

Kinney v. Sutton, 230 N.C. 404 , 53 S.E. 2d 306 ; Lee v. Board of Adjustment, 226 N.C. 107 , 37 S.E. 2d 128 ; In re Appeal of Parker, 214 N.C. 51 , 197 S.E. 706 ; Elizabeth City v. … County, and that tbe Board of Commissioners shall act as a board of adjustment.

Sides v. Cabarrus Memorial Hospital, Inc.

287 N.C. 14 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 14, 1975

Upon the first meeting of the Board of Trustees . . . the said Board shall appoint an executive committee composed of seven members from the trustees, all residents of the county. . . . “Sec. 6. . . . … Accord, Faizan v.

N. C. Railroad v. Swepson

71 N.C. 350 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 5, 1874

Mendenhall himself at first declined to carry it out without consulting the Board. … The same is laid down in State v. Lane, 4 Ired., 431 . A different rule prevails in .public agencies where a majority may act. Id.

State v. Perry

316 N.C. 87 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 5, 1986

App. 419 , 274 S.E. 2d 501 , disc. rev. denied, 302 N.C. 401 , 279 S.E. 2d 355 (1981); State v. Brown, 20 N.C. App. 71 , 200 S.E. 2d 666 [1973], cert. denied, 284 N.C . 617, 202 S.E. 2d 274 (197[4]). … Relying on Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. 590 , 45 L.Ed. 2d 416 (1975); Wong Sun v.

McLaughlin v. Hope Manufacturing Co.

103 N.C. 100 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 5, 1889

In State v. … See Collins v.

State v. Parrish

254 N.C. 301 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 22, 1961

Surety Corp. v. Sharpe, 232 N.C. 98, 103 , 59 S.E. 2d 593 . … The Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. 518 , 4 L. Ed. 629 .” Eason v. Spence, 232 N.C. 579, 584 , 61 S.E. 2d 717 .

Bailey v. City of Winston

157 N.C. 252 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 22, 1911

The plaintiff had the right to use the street in going from the Einzendorf Hotel, where he was boarding, to Gentry’s Dog and Pony Show, under the circumstances shown in -the evidence. … Very instructive and useful cases on this point are Fitzgerald v. Concord, 140 N. C., 110 ; Brown v. Durham, 141 N. C., 252 ; Brew ster v. Elizabeth City, 142 N. C., 11 ; Kinsey v. Kinston, 145 N. C., 108 ; Revis v.

Kee v. . Dillingham

229 N.C. 262 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 29, 1948

. *266 Fields v. Brown, 160 N. C., 295 , 76 S. E., 8 . The rule is well stated in 9 Am. … E. (2d), 484 ; Yarn Co. v. Mauney, 228 N. C., 99 , 44 S. E. (2d), 601 ; McNeill v. McNeill, 223 N. C., 178 (182), 25 S. E. (2d), 615 ; Spencer v. Brown, 214 N. C., 114 , 198 S.

Plyler v. . Elliott

191 N.C. 54 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 27, 1926

In Town of Cornelius v. Lampton, 189 N. … At p. 262, it is said: “A boarding house might be conducted by the contractor (like some company stores concerning which states have legislated —Koekee Consol. Coke Co. v. Taylor, 234 U. S., 224 , 58 L.

Hammond v. City of Charlotte

205 N.C. 469 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 22, 1933

The power of the board of aldermen of the city of Charlotte to levy an annual tax for the maintenance of public schools in the city as well as that of the board of school commissioners to employ teachers and fix their salaries … Bramham v. Durham, 171 N. C., 196 ; Rankin v. Gaston Co., 173 N. C., 683 ; Wilson v. Comrs., 183 N. C., 638 ; Monteith v. Comrs., 195 N. C., 71 .

Perry v. . Adams

83 N.C. 266 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 5, 1880

Parsons v. McBride, 4 Jones, 99 ; Armfield v. Brown, 73 N. C., 81 ; Ashe v. Streator, 8 Jones, 256; State v. Swepson, 81 N. C., 571 ; State v. Davis, 80 N. C., 384 ; Phillipse v. Higdon, Busb., 380. … Armfield v. Brown, supra; Bagley v. Wood, 12 Ired., 90 ; Pendleton v. Pendleton, 2 Jones, 135 . In-the last case, Nash, C.

Urquhart v. Durham & South Carolina Railroad

156 N.C. 581 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 15, 1911

Tbe case comes witbin tbe principles of law laid down in Coley v. R. R., 128 N. C., 534 ; s. c., 129 N. C., 407 . Tbe plaintiff was employed by tbe defendant 1 December, 1907, as a brakeman on its road. … There was no issue as to assumption of risk, and this Court has held in Coley v. R. R., 128 N. C., 534 ; s. c., 129 N. C., 407 , and Biles v. R. R., 139 N.

Widows Fund of Sudan Temple v. Umphlett

246 N.C. 555 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 18, 1957

It had a right to waive provisions inserted for its benefit and prescribe the conditions under which the consent of the board of directors would be given. Wooten v. Order of Odd Fellows, supra; Swygert v. … It merely alleges: “. . . the Secretary of the Widows Fund, without a meeting of the Board of Directors and without notification of the Board of Directors, but acting in good faith . . .” issued the certificate.

Peacock v. County of Scotland

262 N.C. 199 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 12, 1964

In Hinson v. … Field v. Clark, 143 U.S. 649 , 36 L. Ed. 294 ; Provision Co. v. Daves, 190 N.C. 7 , 128 S.E. 593 ; Meador v. Thomas, 205 N.C. 142 , 170 S.E. 110 ; Cox v.

Huggard v. Wake County Hospital System, Inc.

330 N.C. 610 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 10, 1992

State v. . McRae

170 N.C. 712 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 24, 1915

Associate Justice Hoke in Holstein v. … In Cody v. McDowell, 1 Lans. (N.

McLeod v. McLeod

314 N.C. 331 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Aug 13, 1985

McLEOD, III v. Louisa Farmer McLEOD. No. 299P85. Supreme Court of North Carolina. August 13, 1985. Brown, Fox & Deaver, Fayetteville, and Ragsdale, Kirschbaum & Day, Raleigh, for plaintiff.