Case law

State v. . Savage

161 N.C. 245 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 13, 1912

This statute was discussed in S. v. Brown, 113 N. C., 646 , and construed in accordance with the ruling of his Honor. No error.

Hancock v. Commissioners of Craven County

132 N.C. 209 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 24, 1903

The board removed me February 1st, 1899, and employed D. L. Ward. I received $50. The board revoked resolution *211 of December 5th. I offered to perform the services and the board refused to have me. … We think that the board had the power to make the contract for the term of two years that being the term for which it was elected. Roper v. Town of Laurinburg, 90 N. C., 427 .

Chesnutt v. Peters

300 N.C. 359 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 3, 1980

of the Board’s evidence. … Thompson v. Board of Education, 292 N.C. 406, 410 , 233 S.E. 2d 538, 541 (1977).

Forte v. . Boone

114 N.C. 176 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 5, 1894

Allen v. Strickland, 100 N. C., 225 ; State v. Johnson, 109 N. C., 852 ; Clark v. Manufacturing Co., 110 N. C., 111 ; The Code, §597. … Maggett v. Roberts, 108 N. C., 174 . It inight have even been allowed after verdict {Brown v. Mitchell, 102 N. C., 347 ), or, indeed, in this Court. Hodge *178 v. Railroad, 108 N. C., 24, 26 ; Grant v. Rogers, 94 N.

Brinson v. . Lacy

195 N.C. 394 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 28, 1928

Walker, J., in Jones v. Williams, 155 N. C., 179 . Also in Culbreth v. Hall, 159 N. … Collingwood v. Brown, 106 N. C., 362 ; Bird v. Gilliam, 125 N. C., 76 ; Morgan v. Bostic, 132 N. C., 751 . C.

Godwin v. . Bank

145 N.C. 320 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 30, 1907

Brown v. Dail , 117 N.C. 41 ; Williams v. Chapman , (327) 118 N.C. 943 ; Chemical Co. v. McNair , 139 N.C. 326 ; Nelson v. Edwards , 40 Barbour, 283. … Walker v. Brown , 165 U.S. 655 ; Hauseet v. Harrison , 105 U.S. 401 ; Union Trust Co. v. Bulkely , 150 Fed., 510 ; In re J. F. Grandy , 146 Fed., 318 ; Wilder v. Watts , 138 Fed., 436 ; Sabin v.

Stansbury v. . Guilford County

226 N.C. 41 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 31, 1946

The challenge is solely to the authority of the Board of Commissioners of Guilford County to pay the plaintiff more than the $1,800.00 authorized by chapter 427, Public-Local Laws of 1927. Kendall v. Stafford, 178 N. … Hill v. Stansbury, supra; Reed v. Madison, 213 N. C., 145 , 195 S. E., 620 ; Carolina Beach v. Mintz, 212 N. C., 578 , 194 S. E., 309 ; Commissioners of Brunswick v. Walker, 203 N. C., 505, 166 S. E., 385 ; Kendall v.

City of Greensboro v. Simpson

188 N.C. 737 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 19, 1924

The fund arising from the sale is to be turned over to the proper authorities and used for public purposes, as the board of education of Greensboro may determine, presumably for school purposes. Blue v. … C., 321 ; Harris v. Durham, 185 N. C., 572 ; Torrence v. Charlotte, 163 N. C., 562 ; Venable v. School Comrs., 149 N. C., 120 .

Gordon v. Thomasville Chair Co.

205 N.C. 739 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 24, 1934

We think the facts of this case come within the decision of Bellamy v. Mfg. Co., 200 N. C., 676 . In that ease, after citing numerous authorities, at page 679, is the following: In N. C. R. R. Co. v. Zachary, 232 U. S. … The case of Beavers v. Power Co., ante, 34. “The Photographer case” is easily distinguishable. The judgment of the court below is Affirmed.

Hughes v. Clark.

134 N.C. 457 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 22, 1904

In Conrad v. … Pence v. Bryant , 54 W. Va. 263 ; Moore v. Carson, supra .

Caho v. Norfolk & Southern Railway Co.

147 N.C. 20 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 4, 1908

Clonant v. Barnard, 103 N. C., 315 ; Blackimore v. Winders, 144 N. C., 212 . … Corp., sec. 722; Martindale v. Wilson-Cass Co., 134 Pa. St., 348 ( 19 Am. St. Rep., 706 ); Womack Priv. Corp., 472. The authorities are uniform.

Union Trust Co. v. Wilson

182 N.C. 166 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 12, 1921

Some of the other cases in this State are Davison v. Gregory, 132 N. C., 389 ; Wood v. Kincaid, 144 N. C., 393 ; Kendall v. Highway Com., 165 N. C., 600 ; Besseliew v. Brown, 177 N. C., 65 . ¥e held in Wood v. … Peale v.

Farmer v. . Willard

71 N.C. 284 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 5, 1874

Hubbard v. Troy, 2 Ired., 134 . It was objected that the plaintiff could not recover the value of the land, because there was no note or memorandum in writing, given by the party to be charged. … Robeson v. Brown, 63 N. C., 554 , and subsequent cases. The consideration of the bill was land, and the jury, by their verdict, have ascertained its value in the present currency. There is no error. Pee Cueiam.

Parker v. . Harden

122 N.C. 111 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 22, 1898

Bernhardt v. Brown, 118, N. C., at p. 700. … King v. Dudley, 113 N. C., 167 , and cases cited Clark’s Code (2nd Ed.), pp. 223, 224. Appeal dismissed.

McAlister v. . Yancey County

212 N.C. 208 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 13, 1937

See Board of Commissioners v. George, 182 N. C., 414 , 109 S. E., 77 ; Newell v. Green, 169 N. C., 462 , 86 S. E., 291 . … See Reed v. Farmer, 211 N. C., 249 , and Barnes v. Commissioners, 135 N. C., 27 , 47 S. E., 737 . There was error in the order overruling the demurrer in this case. The order is Reversed.

Atkins v. City of Durham

210 N.C. 295 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 15, 1936

City of New Haven, 132 Atl., 467 ; Petty v. City of Atlanta, 148 S. E., 747 ; Board of Park Commissioners v. Prinz, 127 Ky., 460 , 105 S. W., 948 . … Board of Park Comrs. v. Prinz, supra; Comr. v. Sherman, supra. “The care of the public health is, undoubtedly, a subject matter of general concern, and how it shall be accomplished is a public question.

Smith v. TEACHERS'AND STATE EMPLOYEES'RETIREMENT SYSTEM

364 N.C. 621 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 15, 2010

705 S.E.2d 360 (2010) Phyllis Dianne SMITH, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. … TEACHERS' AND STATE EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM, a corporation; Board of Trustees of the Teachers' and State Employees' Retirement System, a body politic and corporate; Department of State Treasurer, Retirement Systems Division

Luther v. Luther

234 N.C. 429 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 7, 1951

Patterson v. Patterson, 230 N.C. 481 , 53 S.E. 2d 658 ; Lamm v. Lamm, 229 N.C. 248 , 49 S.E. 2d 403 ; Elder v. Barnes, 219 N.C. 411 , 14 S.E. 2d 249 ; Smithwick v. Smithwick, 218 N.C. 503 , 11 S.E. 2d 455 ; Dyer v. … Stanley v. Stanley, 226 N.C. 129 , 37 S.E. 2d 118 ; Brown v. Brown, 224 N.C. 556 , 31 S.E. 2d 529 ; Davis v. Davis, 213 N.C. 537 , 196 S.E. 819 . Eandolph County will doubtlessly refund the fine to plaintiff on request.

Costanzo v. Currituck County

Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 22, 2026

COSTANZO V. … Happel v. Guilford Cnty.

Murphy v. . City of Charlotte

174 N.C. 771 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 28, 1917