Case law

Greene v. A. F. Mesick Grocery Co.

159 N.C. 119 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 1, 1912

Avery v. Stewart, 134 N. C., 287 ; Blair v. Brown, 116 N. C., 631 ; Justice v. Luther, 94 N. C., 793 -797. This judgment in plaintiffs’ favor is therefore affirmed. No error.

Jolley v. . Humphries

204 N.C. 672 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 24, 1933

Lineberger v. Phillips, 198 N. C., 661 , 153 S. E., 118 ; Washburn v. Biggerstaff, 195 N. C., 624 , 143 S. E., 210 ; Barbee v. Thompson, 194 N. C., 411 , 139 S. E., 838 . … C., 586 ; Francks v. Whitaker, 116 N. C., 518 ; Chewning v. Mason, 158 N. C., 579 ; Dunn v. Hines, 164 N. C., 114 ; Taylor v. Brown, 165 N. C., 157 ; McCallum v. McCallum, 167 N. C., 310 . Tbe case of Hauser v.

Raftery v. Wm. C. Vick Construction Co.

291 N.C. 180 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 7, 1976

Brown v. Casualty Co., 285 N.C. 313 , 204 S.E. 2d 829 (1974); Kinlaw v. R. R., 269 N.C. 110, 119 , 152 S.E. 2d 329 (1967); Graves v. Welborn, 260 N.C. 688 , 133 S.E. 2d 761 (1963); McCrater v. … It is not necessary for us in the present action to determine whether Causey v. R. R., supra, was correctly decided or whether it is consistent with our decision in Brown v. Casualty Co., supra.

Standard Fashion Co. v. Grant

165 N.C. 453 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 29, 1914

BROWN, J. … Culp v. Love, 127 N. C., 461 . Tbe subject is also discussed, and many other authorities cited, in Bluthenthal v. Kennedy, ante, 372.

Harris v. . Buie

202 N.C. 634 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 20, 1932

Stokes v. Taylor, 104 N. C., 394 ; Dorsey v. Corbett, 190 N. C., 783 ; Brown v. Williams, 196 N. C., 247 . … Nowell v. Basnight, 185 N. C., 142 ; Penland v. Hospital, 199 N. C., 314 ; Batson v. Laundry Co., ante, 560. For the reasons given, in the judgment of the court below we find No error.

Clemmons v. Life Insurance Company of Georgia

274 N.C. 416 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 30, 1968

Green v. Kitchin, 229 N.C. 450 , 50 S.E. 2d 545 ; 41 Am. Jur., Pleading, § 18. See also, Stacy, C.J., concurring, in Brown v. … State ex rel Gosselin v. Trimble, 328 Mo. 760 , 41 S.W. 2d 801 ; Plotkin v. Northland Transportation Co., 204 Minn. 422 , 283 N.W. 758 ; Brown v. Boston Ice Co., 178 Mass. 108 , 59 N.E. 644 .

Winslow Bros. v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad

151 N.C. 250 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 3, 1909

Brown, J. The only assignment of error is to the ruling of his Honor holding the plain'iffs to the value of $100 agreed upon in the bill of lading under which the live stock were shipped. … Rep., 709 ; Express Co. v. Caldwell, 21 Wall., 264 ; Hart v. Railroad, 112 U. S., 331 ; Railroad v. Henlin, 52 Ala., 606 ; Railroad v. Henlin, 56 Ala., 368 ; Railway v. Harwell, 8 So. Rep., 649 ; 11 So.

Guthrie v. City of Durham

168 N.C. 573 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 7, 1915

Aiken v. Mfg. Co. , 141 N.C. 339 . But in this (575) case, if there should be a recovery against the defendant the city of Durham, A. E. Lloyd would be liable to the city, and it could recover in an action against him. … Dillon v. Raleigh , 124 N.C. 184 ; Brown v. Louisburg , 126 N.C. 701 ; Raleigh v. R. R. , 129 N.C. 265 ; Gregg v. Wilmington , 155 N.C. 18 . The discussion in Gregg v.

Commissioners v. . State Treasurer

174 N.C. 142 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 26, 1917

As said in People v. … Keith v. Lockhart , 171 N.C. 451 ; Faison v. Comrs. , 171 N.C. 411 ; Harper v. Comrs., 133 N.C. 106 ; Commissioners Prince George v. Commissioners Laurel , 70 Md. 443 ; Lumber Co. v.

Merrick v. Bedford.

141 N.C. 504 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 22, 1906

Brown, J. The following is taken from the official record in this case: “At the conclusion of the evidence and before the evidence closed, the plaintiff’s counsel announced that the plaintiff would take a nonsuit. … Hayes v. Railroad, 140 N. C., 131 ; Tiddy v. Harris, 101 N. C., 591 .

Eller v. . Fletcher

227 N.C. 345 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 16, 1947

E. (2d), 906 . *347 It was said in White v. Pleasants, 225 N. C., 760 , 36 S. … Crowell v. Parker, 171 N. C., 392 , 88 S. E., 497 ; House v. Abell, 182 N. C., 619 (628), 109 S. E., 877 ; Harrison v. Brown, 222 N. C., 610 , 24 S. E. (2d), 470 ; 8 Am.

Thompson v. Purcell Construction Co.

160 N.C. 390 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 13, 1912

*391 BROWN, J. … Neal v. Town of Marion, 126 N. C., 412 ; Hinshaw v. R. R., 118 N. C., 1047 .

State v. . Redman

217 N.C. 483 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 1, 1940

Royal v. Dodd, 177 N. C., 206 , 98 S. E., 599 ; S. v. Lance, 149 N. C., 551 ; S. v. Davis, 134 N. C., 633 ; S. v. Tyson, 133 N. C., 692 ; S. v. Brown, 100 N. C., 519 . … S. v. Lance, supra.

Crowell v. Crowell

180 N.C. 516 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 8, 1920

Graves v. Howard, 159 N. C., 598 . … Brown v. Brown, Anno. Cases, 1915, D (Conn.), and Feidler v. Feidler, 42 Okla., 124 , are direct authorities for the position herein stated, and in Thompson v. Thompson, 218 U.

Savannah Sugar Refining Co. v. Royal Crown Bottling Co. of Wilmington, Inc.

259 N.C. 103 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 20, 1963

“In Brinkerhof v. Brown, 6 John., ch. 139, Chancellor Kent ruled that different creditors might unite in one bill, the o-bj ect of which was to set aside a fraudulent -conveyance of their common debtor. … It was so 'held also, in McDurmut v. Strong, 4 John., ch. 687; Emerton v. Lyde, 1 Paige, 637 , and Conro v. Iron Co., 12 Barb. 27 , and by this Court in Wall v. Fairley, 73 N.C. 464 .

Chesson v. . Lynch

186 N.C. 625 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 12, 1923

Buie v. Brown, 104 N. C., 335 . As a corollary of this rule, therefore, it may be said that a complaint cannot be overthrown by a demurrer unless it be wholly insufficient. … Walker, J., in Blackmore v. Winders, 144 N. C., p. 215. Tbe nonsuit as to J. P. Lynch will be reversed and tbe entire cause remanded, for a general New trial.

Sale v. State Highway & Public Works Commission

238 N.C. 599 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 25, 1953

Latham v. State Highway Comm., 191 N.C. 141 , 131 S.E. 385 ; Moore v. Clark, supra. The identical contracts offered in evidence in this case by the petitioners were before this Court in Brown v. … In that case Brown and wife trading as Rock Wool Insulating Company sought to recover damages for the loss by fire of goods stored in the warehouse referred to in this case.

Southerland v. . Jones

51 N.C. 321 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 5, 1859

The reason of this is, that the latter form of action is much more convenient, and applicable to a much greater number of circumstances than the former, as is shown in the recent ease of Dupre v. … The old writ of waste, may, however, still be used, as it is certainly in force in this State; Brown v. Blick, 3 Murph. Rep. 511 ; 1 Rev. Stat. ch. 119; Revised Code, ch. 116.

Parrott v. Railroad

140 N.C. 546 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 20, 1906

Brown, J. 1. Defendant .contends that there is no evidence in the record warranting the imposition of smart money. … Crenshaw v. Johnson, 120 N. C., 270 , and Wilson v. Manufacturing Co., 120 N. C., 95 , are in point. The case relied on by defendant (Gattis v. Kilgo, 131 N. C., 199 ), is easily distinguished.

State v. . Moore

46 N.C. 276 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 5, 1854

Tarboro’ is an incorporated town, and has a Board of Commissioners, invested with the usual powers to pass laws or ordinances for its regulation and government. … There is no evidence of any fraud whatever, and the charge is fully answered as to the agreement, by the cases of Young v.