Case law

Duncan v. City of Charlotte

234 N.C. 86 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 17, 1951

It creates for firemen substantial financial benefits, to be paid from the public treasury under the guise of workmen’s compensation benefits, without establishing an occupational disease as the usual incident *93 or result … Bynum, J., ■delivering the opinion, in referring to Article I, Sections 7 and 31, of the Constitution of North Carolina, said: “The wisdom and foresight of our ancestors is nowhere more clearly shown than in providing these

State Ex Rel. Utilities Commission v. Fox

239 N.C. 253 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 15, 1954

The applicant herein duly qualified as an irregular route common carrier in the manner prescribed by the foregoing statute. … It was clearly established' in the hearing before the Commission that the applicant, prior to the adoption of the North Carolina Truck Act in 1947, and until the receipt of the notice from the Interstate Commerce Commission

Blumenthal v. Lynch

315 N.C. 571 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 18, 1986

That the said property does not qualify for the exemption from intangibles tax provided for in GS 105-212. 3. … [W]e think the 1947 amendment was intended to apply to an established or continuing trust .... . . .

Causey v. . Guilford County

192 N.C. 298 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 20, 1926

Tbe election was held, and it was formally determined tbat a majority of tbe qualified voters favored tbe taxes and tbe bonds. … Strict construction refuses to extend the import of words used in a statute so as to embrace cases or acts which the words do not clearly describe; liberal construction is that by which the letter of the statute is enlarged

Shaw v. U.S. Airways, Inc.

362 N.C. 457 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Aug 27, 2008

The General Assembly clearly knew how to use the word “wages” if that is what it intended; in this section, it used the broader term “earnings.” … This part of the section indicates clearly that the legislature intended that additional payments of any kind should be included in the computation of average weekly wage.

In Re Goldsboro Savings & Trust Co.

203 N.C. 238 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 28, 1932

It is an established rule of law that a transfer of stock in a corporation must be made to a person who is not only legally capable of holding the stock but is legally bound to respond when an assessment is made; not legally … C., 761 , but a case in which, according to the records of the bank, the parties are clearly identified — the trans-ferer, the trustee, the cestui que trust.

Phillips v. Phillips

296 N.C. 590 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 16, 1979

Clearly, under the facts of this case, if that is to be the test, plaintiff will have no right to dissent. It is true that statutes dealing with the same subject matter must be construed together. … North Carolina is one of the few jurisdictions which grant only a qualified right. Bolich, Election, Dissent, and Renunciation, 39 N.C.L. Rev. 17, 30 (1960).

Variety Wholesalers, Inc. v. Salem Logistics Traffic Services, LLC

365 N.C. 520 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 13, 2012

Thus, Ark clearly raised these defenses at the trial level, and the trial court by necessity resolved all of these defenses against Ark. … Thus, the analysis would be no different under the UCC — if Ark had no notice, it is immune from liability, but if it did have notice, it is not.

Bynum v. . Thompson

25 N.C. 578 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 5, 1843

Of course, the consequence was stated still more clearly to follow, it the grant to Dewey and Baker did not cover the locus in quo at all. … The declarations of a tenant .of land .are competent to qualify his possession, as .that he *582 does not hold for himself, but under another.

Capehart v. Seaboard & Roanoke Railroad

81 N.C. 438 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 5, 1879

Upon the finding of these facts the plaintiff was clearly entitled to a verdict for the amount of the damages ascertained by the jury. … C., 235 , “that although a common carrier cannot by a general notice to such effect free itself from all liability for property by it trans-f ported, yet by notice brought to the knowledge of the owner it may reasonably qualify

In Re Watson

157 N.C. 340 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 6, 1911

C., 818 , that “It is well established that an act of the legislature will never be -■declared unconstitutional unless it plainly and clearly appears that the General Assembly has exceeded its powers.” … He is given tbe opportunity and instruction to learn a trade and qualify himself for tbe duties of citizenship, so tbat at tbe end of bis term be will go out prepared to take care of himself, and those dependent upon him,

Tanner v. Ervin

250 N.C. 602 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 2, 1959

But the principle is firmly established that taxation is concerned with real ownership rather than with refinements of title. * * * “It (District of Columbia) relies on 31 Code Fed. … Savings Bonds: “The purpose of the treasury regulations is to protect and hold the federal.government immune from any attack on its performance of the contract as made in the bond.

Tate v. . Board of Education

192 N.C. 516 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 10, 1926

has been held that the erection of school buildings is not a necessary municipal expense — that is, an expense which a county, city or town may incur, as a municipal corporation, withoxit the approval of a majority of the qualified … It was clearly tbe purpose of tbe people of North Carolina when they adopted tbe Constitution of tbe State, containing Article IX, entitled “Education,” tbat a general and uniform system of public schools should be established

Hart v. State

368 N.C. 122 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 23, 2015

Ct. 2095, 2100 (1987) (“[T]he challenger must establish that no set of circumstances exists under which the [a]ct would be valid. … This foundational principle of constitutional law is well established in North Carolina. See N.C.

Morganton Hardware Co. v. Morganton Graded Schools

151 N.C. 507 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 23, 1909

But it will be observed that the closing words of that *510 section distinctly qualify and explain wbat precedes. … Section 2022 further elucidates this question and shows clearly what the Legislature meant.

Foil v. Newsome.

138 N.C. 115 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 18, 1905

It is nearly synonymous with the word `property' when that word is not qualified by the word `personal.' … To put any other construction upon the language used would give to the real estate, not specifically devised, a direction clearly inconsistent with his expressed wish, and destroy the general scheme or plan adopted for the

State v. Watson

311 N.C. 252 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 5, 1984

Therefore, reasons defendant, proof of every shot was necessary to establish that one of the shots killed the victim. … He was “afraid of shooting” although he qualified as a rifleman or sharpshooter while in the Marine Corps. His mental problems in 1967 supposedly began following a particularly brutal encounter with the enemy.

Commissioners of Johnston County v. Lacy

174 N.C. 141 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 26, 1917

A perusal of the statute will disclose that, while the bonds of the State are to be positive obligations so far as the creditor or holder is concerned, it was clearly contemplated that the State should be ultimately reimbursed … shall contract a debt, pledge its faith, or loan its credit, nor shall any tax be levied oí collected by any officers of the same, except for the necessary expenses *147 thereof, unless by a vote of tbe majority of the qualified

Stanmire v. Powell

35 N.C. 312 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 15, 1852

Yet, that wouM be so, if the resolution extended to land in Cherokee; for, as the entry laws never extended to that county, there could be neither an entry taker, nor surveyor; qualified to discharge the duties-belonging … For, the se - cond branch of the resolution clearly denotes that, by saying, that the warrant or warrants may be laid, &c.”

Energy Investors Fund, L.P. v. Metric Constructors, Inc.

351 N.C. 331 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 3, 2000

That the limited partner is immune to personal liability for partnership debts save for his original investment, is not thought to be an “owner” of partnership property, and does not manage the business may distinguish him … While a common law duty of care may arise out of contractual obligations assumed with another party, our case law clearly provides that those obligations must result from some actual working relationship between a plaintiff