Case law

Busbee v. Commissioners of Wake County

93 N.C. 143 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 5, 1885

moneys needed for the purpose out of the county treasury, and the case is not within the terms of §2824 of The Code, which is confined to cases in which a favoring and approving popular vote has been taken, by force of the qualifying … In answer to a suggestion comparing the benefits of a school established in a district, with that received by land for a local improvement, a careful writer on the subject thus speaks: “ In the theory of local assessments

Hoke County Board of Education v. State

358 N.C. 605 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 30, 2004

However, the State’s power to establish such an age does not answer the question of whether or not it must address the particular needs of those children who are, or are approaching, the established age for school admission … Nevertheless, neither side has demonstrated to the satisfaction of this Court that it is either the only qualifying means or even the only known qualifying means.

Midyette v. Grubbs

145 N.C. 85 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 25, 1907

These authorities also clearly establish that, on the expiration of the time stated in such a contract within which the timber may be removed, all right in the vendee shall cease and determine, and the estate in so much of … Our decisions, then, having established the principle *89 that standing timber is realty, “as much a part of the realty as the soil itself” (Douglas, J., in Lumber Co. v.

Gammons v. North Carolina Department of Human Resources

344 N.C. 51 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 31, 1996

Generally, the State is immune from suit unless it expressly consents to be sued. By the 1951 enactment of the Tort Claims Act, the General Assembly partially waived the sovereign immunity of the State. … Next, article I, section 108A-1 of chapter 108A, entitled “Social Services,” provides in pertinent part: Every county shall have a board of social services which shall establish county policies for the programs established

State v. Loesch

237 N.C. 611 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 29, 1953

The factual situation there is clearly distinguishable from that presented on this appeal. … The provisions of G.S. 90-21 merely establish a method whereby the Board of Medical Examiners of the State of North Carolina may procure an investigation by the Attorney-General with respect to alleged violations of sections

Acker v. . Pridgen

158 N.C. 337 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 20, 1912

The words of' the habendum qualify and explain what is stated in the premises, and in the habendum the children are specified who are to take in remainder, viz., the two plaintiffs, Marion Pridgen, Ellen Beatty, children … The defendant invokes the doctrine of stare decisis, and claims that a rule of property had been established by the older decisions which should protect her title. We do not think the principle laid down in Hill v.

Marcus Bros. Textiles, Inc. v. Price Waterhouse, LLP

350 N.C. 214 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 9, 1999

For the element of knowledge, the material issues of fact demonstrate that the movants have failed to satisfy the burden of clearly establishing the lack of any triable issue of fact in the record properly before the Court … This Court has recently reiterated the strict standards by which the propriety of summary judgment is determined: Before summary judgment may be entered, it must be clearly established by the record before the trial court

State Ex Rel. Martin v. Preston

325 N.C. 438 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 9, 1989

[R]egular Judges of the Superior Court shall be elected by the qualified voters and shall hold office for terms of eight years and until their successors are elected and qualified. . . . … It is well settled in this State that the courts have the power, and it is their duty in proper cases, to declare an act of the General Assembly unconstitutional — but it must be plainly and clearly the case.

Howerton v. Arai Helmet, Ltd.

358 N.C. 440 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 25, 2004

Hooper is not qualified to offer the opinion that a full-face helmet would have prevented plaintiff’s injury. … Howerton clearly demonstrates that he did not, in fact, detrimentally rely on the assumed misrepresentation.” Howerton, 158 N.C. App. at 339, 581 S.E.2d at 830 .

Smyth v. . McKissick

222 N.C. 644 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 17, 1943

The' final distribution of the corpus of the trust funds established by the trust indentures was postponed until after the death of the trustor’s three daughters and daughter-in-law. … The distinction between these cases, here controlling, and those cases in which the person to take is determined at the death of the testator, is clearly drawn in Witty v. Witty, 184 N. C., 375 , 114 S. E., 482 .

Merchants National Bank v. Branson

165 N.C. 344 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 8, 1914

both the issue and the credibility of the evidence offered tending to establish the position of either party in reference to it were for the jury and not for the court. … the transaction are shown, there is no fair or reasonable inference to the contrary permissible, the judge could charge the jury, if they believed the evidence, to find for plaintiff, the burden in such case having been clearly

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hospital Authority v. North Carolina Industrial Commission

336 N.C. 200 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 6, 1994

The doctrine of sovereign immunity — that the state cannot be sued in its own courts without its consent — is firmly established in North Carolina law. E.g., Ferrell v. … On the other hand, the official status of the defendants, standing alone, does not immunize them from suit. . . .

State v. Bullard

312 N.C. 129 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 6, 1984

Robbins was clearly in a superior position and better qualified to compare the bloody bare footprint found on the bridge with those of the defendant. … This evidence clearly tends to prove that defendant had a motive to kill Pedro.

Seawell v. Parsons Lumber Co.

172 N.C. 320 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 25, 1916

Tbe distinction between tbe negligence of counsel, while engaged in tbe performance of a professional duty, and the negligence of tbe party, is clearly marked, and tbe uniform rule with us is tbat the negligence of tbe first … We have, then, what is equivalent to an offer of employment, with at least a qualified acceptance and a direct promise to perform an act which could only arise out of the employment, and Mr.

N.C. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., Inc. v. Martin

Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 18, 2020

In order to receive coverage under the Policy, defendants must qualify as “insureds.” … Alternatively, defendants and the amici suggest that Paschal established the existence of a “family farm exception,” allowing family members who live near each other on a contiguous family farm to qualify as residents of

Trull v. Seaboard Air Line Railway Co.

151 N.C. 545 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 23, 1909

Not only is this the primary significance of the language of the statute, giving a right of action in case of wrongful conduct causing death, and its true meaning, as established by these authoritative interpretations, but … attentive to his own placing and the dangers incident to it, and that this negligence on the part of the intestate was concurrent with that of defendant’s employees at the precise time and place of the injury, and comes clearly

Wynn v. TRUSTEES OF CHARLOTTE COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYS.

255 N.C. 594 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 8, 1961

Indeed, they allege, clearly and positively, that the bonds and tax were duly authorized, "with the proceeds to be used by the Charlotte Community College System for construction of new campuses for Charlotte College and … It is noted that plaintiffs do not allege that any qualified prospective student has been or will be excluded from attending either Charlotte College or Carver College solely on the basis of race.

State v. Ledford

315 N.C. 599 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 18, 1986

The well-established rule is that opinion testimony to the effect that a defendant’s conduct caused injury or death is clearly inadmissible as a legal conclusion. However, Dr. … Boatright was fully qualified to make. It clearly did not address a legal conclusion or standard. Dr. Boatright could not and did not testify that, in his opinion, defendant’s alleged conduct on 23 July caused Mrs.

State Ex Rel. Blount v. Spencer

114 N.C. 770 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 5, 1894

Board of Commissioners was appointed with clearly defined duties to have surveyed and mapped a certain area in which was included that part of Pamlico Sound which was within the jurisdiction of the county-of ITyde, “ whereon … of the grant was upon the land covered by the waters of Pamlico Sound, which is navigable water, and that the same was not subject to grant under the general laws regarding entries and grants, and became so subject in a qualified

State v. . O'Neal

187 N.C. 22 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 22, 1924

The traverse raised a plain issue of fact and it was clearly the right of the State by the cross-examination to elicit any circumstances of probative value tending reasonably to show the defendant’s opportunity for the manufacture … A witness may not be examined as to any particular trait of character on a matter of general reputation, although of his own motion he may qualify a general statement, and “in no case either on direct examination or on cross-examination