Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.44s
178 N.C. 334 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 22, 1919
Brown claims red A to be the beginning corner; I don’t understand the map. Mr. Smith’s fence was directly on the line when Mr. Brown bought the land. That is where the surveyors run. … I do not know when the Browns began to claim that black E was not the right corner.” W. A. Smith: I know the land in dispute in this action. I owned the land at one time claimed, by the Browns.
Cited 4 timesPublished259 N.C. 480 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 22, 1963
Schiele v. Ins. Co., 171 N.C. 426 , 88 S.E. 764 ; English v. English, 87 N.C. 497 ; Norton v. McLaurin, 125 N.C. 185 , 34 S.E. 269 ; Mann v. Hall, 163 N.C. 50 , 79 S.E. 437 .” In Bierson v. … Moore v. Deal, supra; Jones v. Ice & Fuel Co., supra.
Cited 4 timesPublished241 N.C. 116 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 10, 1954
Pridgen, 158 N.C. 337 , 74 S.E. 335 ; Midgett v. Meekins, 160 N.C. 42 , 75 S.E. 728 ; Seawell v. Hall, 185 N.C. 80 , 116 S.E. 189 ; Boyd v. Campbell, 192 N.C. 398 , 135 S.E. 121 ; Jefferson v. … Boyd v. Campbell, supra; Bagwell v. Hines, 187 N.C. 690 , 122 S.E. 659 .
Cited 5 timesPublished124 N.C. 292 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 28, 1899
Norwood v. Morrow , 20 N.C. 448 . … McCormick v. Monroe , 46 N.C. 13 .
Cited 1 timesPublished127 N.C. 562 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 4, 1900
We suppose the Solicitor, in making this demand, thought his action was authorized under the opinion in Mott v. Board, 126 N. C., 866 , and that it was the duty of the commissioners to draw and summon this grand jury.
Cited 1 timesPublished131 N.C. 264 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 11, 1902
C., 214 ; Summerrow v. Baruch, Ibid., 202; People v. Dye, 75 Cal., 108 ; Hubback v. Ross, 96 Cal., 426 ; Bergtholdt v. Porter, 114 Cal., at page 689; and were therefore properly excluded. … To which Brown made no reply. This is relied upon by plaintiffs as some evidence to show agency, but we do not it does. Brown did not consent to do so.
Cited 3 timesPublished690 S.E.2d 693 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 22, 2009
BROWN v. NC DOC, Alvin Keller, as Sec. of DOC, and Kenneth Royster, as Superintendent, Raleigh Correctional Center for Women. No. 517P09. Supreme Court of North Carolina. December 22, 2009. Tiare B. … Petitioner Faye Brown shall file her brief in this Court on or before 31 January 2010. By Order of the Court in Conference, this 22nd day of December, 2009.
Cited 1 timesPublished197 N.C. 738 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 20, 1929
Jenkins v. Parker, 192 N. C., 188 , 134 S. E., 419 ; Baker v. Edwards, 176 N. C., 229 , 97 S. E., 16 ; Driller Co. v. Worth, 117 N. C., 515 , 23 S. … Power Co. v. Taylor, 194 N. C., 231 , 139 S. E., 381 ; Speas v. Bank, 188 N. C., 524 , 125 S. E., 398 .
Cited 3 timesPublished267 N.C. 189 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 4, 1966
State v. Brown, 266 N.C. 55 , 145 S.E. 2d 297 . *191 In our opinion this assignment of error is without merit since the jury returned a verdict of guilty as charged in the bill of indictment.
Cited 2 timesPublished150 N.C. 441 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 14, 1909
The words “in an east direction” along the road, should have been “west,” as the plaintiff avers and as is evident' (Wiseman v. Green, 127 N. C., 288 ), but that fact has no bearing on the controversy. … Cullen v. Absher, 119 N. C., 441 .
Cited 2 timesPublished260 N.C. 518 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 20, 1963
Index, Pleadings § 15; Carroll v. Brown, 228 N.C. 636 , 46 S.E. 2d 715 . Neither complaint alleges any such -agreement. … Restatement, Securi *521 ty § 48, Comment a; Bank v. Hessee, 207 N.C. 71 , 175 S.E. 826 ; Sykes v. Everett, 167 N.C. 600, 608 , 83 S.E. 585 . The general rule is succinctly stated in 41 Am.
Cited 2 timesPublished
Ask Donna