Case law

Norment v. . Johnston

32 N.C. 89 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Aug 5, 1849

Hogg v. Ashe, 1 Hay. 471 . But it is argued for the defendant, •that, under the agreement with Alexander, she has a right to charge the board to the firm, and that, therefore, it is a good set off. … Cotton v. Evans, 1 Dev. & Bat. Eq. 284 , Weed v. Richardson, 2 Dev. & Bat. 535.

Williams v. . Williams

175 N.C. 160 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 6, 1918

Campbell v. McArthur , 9 N.C. 38 ; Kea v. Robeson , 40 N.C. 373 ; Rowland v. Rowland , 93 N.C. 214 ; Gudger v. White , 141 N.C. 507 ; Triplett v. Williams , 149 N.C. 394 ; Beacon v. Amos , 161 N.C. 357 ; Brown v. … Brown , 168 N.C. 4 ; Gold Mining Co. v. Lumber Co. , 170 N.C. 273 . We said in Brown v.

Mullen v. Town of Louisburg

225 N.C. 53 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 21, 1945

Joyner v. Stancill, 108 N. C., 153 ; Hawkins v. Cedar Works, 122 N. C., 87 ; Sturtevant v. Cotton Mills, 171 N. C., 119 , 87 S. E., 992 ; Hickory v. Catawba County, 206 N. C., 165 , 173 S. E., 56 ; Wilson v. … Jur., 175 ; Pue v. Hood, 222 N. C., 310 , 22 S. E. (2d), 561 ; Lee v. Waynesville, 184 N. C., 565 , 115 S. E., 51 ; Pickler v. Board, 149 N. C., 221 ; Crotts v. Winston-Salem, 170 N. C., 24 , 86 S. E., 792 .

Weaver v. . Hampton

204 N.C. 42 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 25, 1933

Weaver v. Hampton, 201 N. C., 798 . … Tbe Circuit Court of Appeals for tbe Fourth Circuit in Board of Commis *45 sioners v. Tollman, 145 Fed., 753 , recognized and sanctioned tbe right of county commissioners to compromise law suits.

State v. Eppley

282 N.C. 249 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 15, 1972

State v. Foster, 268 N.C. 480 , 151 S.E. 2d 62 ; State v. Ramsey, 241 N.C. 181 , 84 S.E. 2d 807 ; State v. Weinstein, 224 N.C. 645 , 31 S.E. 2d 920 ; State v. Holbrook, 223 N.C. 622 , 27 S.E. 2d 725 ; State v. … State v. *260 Brown, 263 N.C. 786 , 140 S.E. 2d 413 ; State v. Law, 227 N.C. 103 , 40 S.E. 2d 699 ; State v. Weinstein, supra.

Flowers v. City of Charlotte

195 N.C. 599 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 9, 1928

The judgment must be affirmed, upon the authority of Charlotte v. Brown, 165 N. … In Charlotte v. Brown, supra, it is said: “The fact that the lot is a corner lot, and is in two improvement districts, is immaterial.

Arbogast v. . Buncombe County

208 N.C. 515 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 9, 1935

such report has been filed in the office of the county clerk, and that at the first regular meeting of the said board of commissioners to be held after the expiration of said ten days notice, the said board of commissioners … Tester v. Nashville, 190 N. C., 265 , 129 S. E., 593 ; Jones v. Durham, 197 N. C., 127 , 147 S. E., 824 . Adopting tbe words of tbe concluding paragraph in Tester v.

Lumber Co. v. . Hutton

152 N.C. 538 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 11, 1910

In Brown v. … Brown v. House , 116 N.C. 866 ; Cox v. Cox , 91 N.C. 356 ." The Court further said, quoting from Mayo v.

Wynn v. . Robinson

216 N.C. 347 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 18, 1939

Denton v. Vassiliades, 212 N. C., 513 , 193 S. E., 737 . Tbe ruling is supported by tbe record. Bigham v. Foor, 201 N. C., 14 , 158 S. E., 548 . Tbe case of Plott v. Michael, 214 N. C., 665 , 200 S. … The constitutionality of ch. 75, Public Laws 1929, was upheld in Ashley v. Brown, 198 N. C., 369 , 151 S. E., 725 . Defendant’s present challenge must meet with a like result.

Mercer v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad

154 N.C. 399 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 22, 1911

Justice Brown, in Avery v. Lumber Co., 146 N. … Marks v. Cotton Mills, 135 N. C., 287 ; Nail v. Brown, 150 N.

Huyck Corp. v. Town of Wake Forest

321 N.C. 589 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 3, 1988

Brown, Jr. and wife, Emma Brown; Russell S. Finch and wife, Anne C. Finch; Richard E. Hailey and wife, Becky Hailey; Jerry W. Laws and wife, Pat Laws; James L. Davis and wife, Mrs. James L. Davis; James L. … Pendergrass v. TOWN OF WAKE FOREST. No. 320PA87. Supreme Court of North Carolina. February 3, 1988. *140 I. Beverly Lake and Jane P. Harris, Wake Forest, for petitioners-appellants.

Warren v. . Short

119 N.C. 39 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 5, 1896

Upon this principle, as well as upon the reason of the thing, it was held in Whitted v. … Williams v. Chapman, 118 N. C., 943 ; Brown v. Dail, 117 N. C., 41 ; Loftin v. Hines, 107 N. C., 360 .

State v. . Gorham

115 N.C. 721 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 5, 1894

We are not disposed to question the principle so often laid down by the Supreme Court of the United States from Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat., 419 , to Brennan v. Titusville, 14 S. C. … Robbins v. Shelby, 120 U. S. Rep., 489 , citing Machine Co. v. Gage, supra, and Brown v. Houston, 114 U. S. Rep., 622 .

Hinton v. Cline

238 N.C. 136 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 12, 1953

McClamroch v. Ice Co., 217 N.C. 106 , 6 S.E. 2d 850 ; Johnston v. Johnston, 213 N.C. 255 , 195 S.E. 807 ; Waller v. Hipp, 208 N.C. 117 , 179 S.E. 428 ; Blum v. R. R., 187 N.C. 640 , 122 S.E. 562 ; Hoke v. … Collins, 125 N.C. 83 , 34 S.E. 242 , 47 L.R.A. 33 ; Benton v. Railroad, 122 N.C. 1007 , 30 S.E. 333 ; Norton v. Railroad, 122 N.C. 910 , 29 S.E. 886 ; Goodson v. Mullin and Derr, 92 N.C. 211 ; Brown v.

INTEGON NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY v. Sechrist

365 N.C. 200 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 15, 2011

710 S.E.2d 13 (2011) INTEGON NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY v. Jane Elizabeth SECHRIST, Justin Paul Fryar, Paul S. Fryar, and North Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company, Inc. No. 85P11. … David Brown, for N.C. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. Torin L. Fury, Greensboro, for Integon National Insurance Company.

Wolfe v. Pearson

114 N.C. 621 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 15, 1894

In Zottman v. … State v. Long, 94 N. C., 896 . It was broadly stated in State v.

Eason v. CLEVELAND DRAFT HOUSE, LLC

363 N.C. 373 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 17, 2009

678 S.E.2d 237 (2009) Sherry Allison EASON v. CLEVELAND DRAFT HOUSE, LLC and Baldies Restaurant Group, LLC. No. 140P09. Supreme Court of North Carolina. June 17, 2009. Deborah Bowers, David L. … Brown, Greensboro, for Draft House, et al. Robert M. Tatum, Raleigh, for Eason.

Rowland v. Old Dominion Building & Loan Ass'n

115 N.C. 825 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 5, 1894

It organized a branch of its business at Henderson, in this State, and there had what is styled a “ local board ” of officers or managers. … It was said by that Court, in the case of White v.

Spruill v. Davenport

178 N.C. 364 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 22, 1919

C., 63 , and Baker v. State, 27 Ind., 485 . See, also, Scott v. Fishblate, 117 N. C., 265 ; Burton v. Fulton, 49 Pa. St., 151; Stewart v. Southard, 17 Ohio St., 402 ; Reed v. Conway, 20 Mo., 22 ; Donahoe v. … Ruffin v. Garrett, 174 N. C., 134 . The passage quoted by plaintiff’s counsel from 35 Cyc., 1095, does not sustain the position that the members of the board- are liable individually.

Hammond v. . McRae

182 N.C. 747 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 29, 1921

Reid v. R. R. , 162 N.C. 355 , and there are *Page 805 authoritative decisions elsewhere extending the principle to the action of the electorate. Township Board v. Carolan , 182 Ill. 119 ; McGillivray, Appellant, v. … Cited: Jones v. New Bern , 184 N.C. 134 ; Miller v. School Dist. , 184 N.C. 202 ; Galloway v. Bd. of Ed. , 184 N.C. 248 ; Burney v. Comrs. , 184 N.C. 277 ; Bd. of Ed. v. Bray , 184 N.C. 487 ; S. v.