Case law

Lee v. HL Green Co.

236 N.C. 83 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Aug 22, 1952

Ross v. Sterling Drug Store, 225 N.C. 226 , 34 S.E.2d 64 ; Watkins v. Taylor Furnishing Co., 224 N.C. 674 , 31 S.E.2d 917 ; Brown v. Montgomery Ward & Co., 217 N.C. 368 , 8 S.E.2d 199 ; Parker v. … of the planks at this place looked practically dry, and then there were streaks on them that looked damp as if it was damp with oil and it was more so in the place where I walked. * * * There seemed to be on part of the boards

Sylva Supply Co. v. Watt

181 N.C. 432 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 3, 1921

Aydlett v. Brown, 153 N. C., 334 . And again, in Rosser v. Bynum, 168 N. … C., 435 ; Kerr v. Saunders, 122 N. C., 635 ; Pruden v. R. R., 121 N. C., 511 ; Petit v. Woodlief, 115 N. C., 125 ; Koonce v. Russell, 103 N. C., 179 . See, also, Mercer v. Lumber Co., 173 N. C., 49 .

Gainey v. Local 71, International Brotherhood of Teamsters

252 N.C. 256 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 6, 1960

And the possibility of partial relief from the Board does not, in such a case as is here presented, deprive a party of available state remedies for all damages suffered. See International Union, United A.A.A.I. W. v. … A collective bargaining agent certified by the National Labor Relations Board is authorized to negotiate questions of seniority. Ford Motor Co. v. Huffman, 1953, 345 U.S. 330 , 97 L. Ed. 1048 .

Ferebee v. . Thomason

205 N.C. 263 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 11, 1933

C., 32 ; Brinkley v. Norman, 190 N. C., 851 ; Cullins v. State College, 198 N. C., 337 . … Temporary restraining order will be continued until hearing, where serious controversy exists, and continuance cannot harm defendant, while dissolving might injure plaintiff, Brown v. Aydlett, 193 N. C., 832 .”

Swindell v. Town of Belhaven

173 N.C. 1 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 21, 1917

C., 487 ; Evans v. Comrs., 89 N. C., 154 ; McKethan v. Comrs., 92 N. C., 243 ; Swinson v. Mount Olive, 147 N. C., 611 . … Water-works and electric lights: Fawcett v. Mount Airy, 134 N. C., 125 , overruling Edgerton v. Water Co., 126 N. C., 93 ; Mayo v. Washington, 122 N. C., 5 ; Charlotte v. Shepard, 120 N. C., 412 ; Thrift v.

State v. . Davis

171 N.C. 809 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 31, 1916

The charter of the town of Andrews specifically authorizes the board of aldermen “to make regulations to cause the due observance of Sunday” ; but if this were not sufficient, the Revisal, sec. 2923, gives power to cities … Frolickstein v. Mobile, 40 Ala., 725 ; Scales v. State, 47 Ark., 476; Com. v. Has., 122 Mass., 40 ; Com. v. Wolf, 3 S. and R. (Pa.), 48; Specht v. Com., 8 Pa. St., 312; Society, etc., v. Com., 53 Pa.

Irving v. . Glazier

4 N.C. 405 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 5, 1816

The sloop received on board the lighter a load which he was hired to carry. It was not a full load for her, and she used no shifting boards. … NOTE. — On the question of average, see Ferguson v. Fitt , 2 N.C. 230 . (410)

R. R. v. . Sanford

193 N.C. 340 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 16, 1927

R. v. Sanford, supra . … McAden v. Watkins , 191 N.C. p. 105 .

Thompson v. De Vonde

235 N.C. 520 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 30, 1952

Hence he was at least an invitee, Pafford v. Construction Co., 217 N.C. 730 , 9 S.E. 2d 408 ; Coston v. … Schwingle v. Kellenberger, 217 N.C. 577 , 8 S.E. 2d 918 ; Brown v. Montgomery Ward & Co., 217 N.C. 368 , 8 S.E. 2d 199 ; Pridgen v. Kress & Co., 213 N.C. 541 , 196 S.E. 821 ; Anderson v.

Rogers v. . McGowan

68 N.C. 520 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 5, 1873

The questions in this case are substantially the same *Page 360 as in Nichols v. McKee, ante , 429, and Welker v. Bledsoe, ante , 457, and are governed by the same principles and for the same reasons. … Cited: Welker v. Bledsoe, ante , 465; Brown v. Turner , 70 N.C. 107 .

Fowler v. Atlantic Co.

234 N.C. 542 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 21, 1951

Brafford v. Cook, supra ( 232 N.C. 699, p. 701 ); Maddox v. Brown, 233 N.C. 519 , 64 S.E. 2d 864 . See also Piner v. Richter, 202 N.C. 573 , 163 S.E. 561 . … Ervin v. Mills Co., supra ( 233 N.C. 415 ); Grimm v. Watson, 233 N.C. 65 , 62 S.E. 2d 538 ; Hobbs v. Drewer, 226 N.C. 146 , 37 S.E. 2d 121 ; Atkins v. Transportation Co., 224 N.C. 688 , 32 S.E. 2d 209 ; Cole v.

Jarrett v. Green

230 N.C. 104 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 9, 1949

Van Alstyne v. Brown, 77 N.J.Eq. 455, 78 Atl. 678 ; Scott on Trusts, Yol. 2, See. 176. … Bank v. Crowder, 194 N.C. 312 , 139 S.E. 601 ; Costner v. Cotton Mills Co., 155 N.C. 128 , 71 S.E. 85 ; Lemly v. Atwood, 65 N.C. 46 .

Cathey v. Shope

238 N.C. 345 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 14, 1953

Satterwhite v. Hicks, 44 N.C. 105 ; Brown’s Heirs v. Patton’s Heirs, 35 N.C. 446 ; Lee v. Williams, 112 N.C. 510 . … Lowder, 167 N.C. 331 , 83 S.E. 464 ; Bell v. Brown, 227 N.C. 319 . Defendants rely heavily on what they term their Exceptions 11 and 12, directed to the exclusion of testimony of the feme defendant.

Stewart v. . Lumber Co.

146 N.C. 47 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 20, 1907

Three justices concurring in the opinion of Justice Brown upon each issue, it becomes the opinion of the Court, and a new trial is ordered upon the second issue, relating to damages. Cited: S. v. … Fulton , 149 N.C. 501 ; Powell v. Fiber Co. , 150 N.C. 15 ; Jones v. R. R., ib. , 476; Blackburn v. Lumber Co. , 152 N.C. 363 ; Marlowe v. Bland , 154 N.C. 146 ; Dover v. Mfg. Co. , 157 N.C. 329 ; Bucken v. R.

Stone v. Steamship Co.

139 N.C. 193 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 3, 1905

Morehead v. Brown, 51 N. C., 367 . Furthermore, the plaintiff had been promptly notified of the arrival of the goods, and, so far as appears, had been given ample time and opportunity to remove them. … Chalk v. Railroad, 85 N. C., 423 ; Holdsclaw v. Duff, 21 Mo., 392 . No Error.

State v. Leroux

326 N.C. 368 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 5, 1990

State v. Brown, 320 N.C. 179 , 358 S.E.2d 1 . We conclude that this argument has no merit. … State v. Brown, 310 N.C. 563 , 313 S.E.2d 585 (1984).

Duffy v. . Phipps

180 N.C. 313 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 10, 1920

Henofer v. Realty Co., 178 N. C., 584 . Tbe defendant contends tbat tbe contract was merged in tbe deed, and therefore tbe complaint does not state a cause of action. … McGee v. Craven, 106 N. C., 353 ; Brown v. Hobbs, 147 N. C., 77 ; Kendricks v. Ins. Co., 124 N. C., 318 .

State Ex Rel. Sneed v. Bullock

80 N.C. 132 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 5, 1879

He was thereupon notified to appear before the new board and qualify according to the requirements of law. … The case is not like that of Jones v. Jones, ante, 127, though many of the facts are common to both.

Dockery v. Fairbanks-Morse Co.

172 N.C. 529 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 15, 1916

Joyner v. Earley, 139 N. C., 49 ; Worth v. Trust Co., 151 N. C., 196 ; Pritchard v. R. R., 166 N. C., 535 ; 31 Cyc., 409, 410, 411. … Boulhac v. Brown, 87 N. C., 4 ; Wilson v. Lineberger, 82 N. C., 413 ; S. v. Evans, 74 N. C., 325 . “No appeal lies from one Superior Court judge to another.” May v. Lumber Co., 119 N. C., 98 ; Alexander v.

Best v. . Best

228 N.C. 9 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 8, 1947

E., 822 ; Green v. Green, 131 N. C., 533 , 42 S. E., 954 ; Dowdy v. Dowdy, 154 N. C., 556 , 70 S. E., 917 ; Carnes v. Carnes, 204 N. C., 636 , 169 S. E., 222 ; Pollard v. Pollard, supra; Howell v. Howell, 223 N. … In Martin v.