Case law

Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. N.C. Dep't of Revenue

Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 13, 2024

“[R]elative and qualifying words, phrases, and clauses ordinarily are -12-  PHILIP MORRIS USA, INC. V. N.C. … To the extent that Aronov established a rule permitting deference to the Secretary in all circumstances, we disavow any such understanding.

Briggs v. City of Raleigh

195 N.C. 223 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 22, 1928

within the vicinity of Raleigh, not more than five miles from the State capitol, a public municipal purpose for which a donation of $75,000 and more of public funds may be authorized by a favorable vote of a majority of the qualified … An appropriation of money raised by taxation, or of property taken by right of eminent domain, by way of gift to an individual for bis own private uses exclusively, would clearly be an excess of legislative power.

State v. White

340 N.C. 264 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 2, 1995

The evidence before the trial court at the time the motion was heard clearly showed that none of the factors in N.C.G.S. § 15A-952(g) was present in this case. N.C.G.S. § 15A-952(g) (1992). … Second, even if the trial court implicitly accepted them as expert witnesses, these nurses were not qualified to testify as expert witnesses.

Johnson v. Seaboard Air Line Railway Co.

163 N.C. 431 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 22, 1913

The duty of the traveler arising under this rule is not always an absolute one, but may be so qualified by attendant circumstances as to require the issue as to his contributory negligence, by not taking proper measures for … The second exception is clearly untenable. It was irrelevant to the controversy that the witness C. C.

Shaw v. Lee

258 N.C. 609 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 1, 1963

The answer to this is, we think, clearly and concisely stated in Villaret v. Villaret, 169 F 2d 677 , quoted with approval by the Supreme Court of Tennessee in Prince v. … We do not deem it wise to voyage into such an uncharted sea, leaving behind well established conflict of laws rules. Affirmed.

Waynesville v. . Satterthwait

136 N.C. 225 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 18, 1904

By the provisions of chap. 375, Laws 1903, the commissioners of Haywood County are authorized, when the proposition so to do has been approved by the qualified voters of Waynesville township, to issue and sell bonds of said … This is a delicate question, and we should be slow to find, unless clearly expressed, an intention on the part of the Legislature to confer such power.

Quick v. Quick

305 N.C. 446 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 4, 1982

In Williams , we said: The . . . phrase clearly means more than a level of mere economic survival. … Counsel correctly argued that supporting spouses have a lengthy period of virtual immunity from support obligations while cases work their way through the appellate process.

Watkins v. North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners

358 N.C. 190 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 2, 2004

We acknowledge that, in a medical malpractice action, the standard of care is normally established by the testimony of a qualified expert. Jackson v. Mountain Sanitarium & Asheville Agrie. … Moreover, the General Assembly has clearly defined the “practice of dentistry” to encompass the practice of orthodontics.

State v. Miller

363 N.C. 96 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 20, 2009

Instead of clarifying existing law, or simply following this Court’s well-established precedent, the majority’s decision attempts to erase current jurisprudence by allowing any questionable circumstance to qualify as substantial … The State reluctantly admitted to this error during oral arguments, as it was clearly apparent in State’s Exhibit One. .

Artis ex rel. Sanders v. Artis

228 N.C. 754 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 14, 1948

Artis and Mark Artis heirs and assigns,” clearly and unqualifiedly convey, and relate to a conveyance of, a fee simple estate. … Carroll, supra, the Court said: “In considering the contention that the plaintiff acquired a defeasible fee, we must keep in mind two clearly established principles: (1) A fee may be limited after a fee by way of executory

Pigford v. Norfolk Southern Railroad

160 N.C. 93 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 25, 1912

We cannot assent to this proposition, except in a qualified sense. … There is a clearly marked line of divide between assumption of risk and contributory negligence, tbe former being confined to tbe ordinary perils of tbe service, and tbe servant could not be held by bis contract, or upon

Roller v. Allen

245 N.C. 516 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 27, 1957

However, the exception to the rule is as well established as the rule itself. Clinard v. Winston-Salem, 217 N.C. 139 , 6 S.E. 2d 867 . … In order to qualify for the examination, the applicant must have had two years experience as a student or mechanic, or its equivalent, next preceding the application for license.

Barnawell v. . Threadgill

56 N.C. 50 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 5, 1856

Threadgill, the executor therein named, was duly qualified, and took upon himself the burden of its execution. … That much is almost avowed in their answers, and is very clearly established by the proofs.

State v. Stafford

274 N.C. 519 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 9, 1968

Ed. at 208, 61 A.L.R. 2d at 1128 , pointed out that the case was “clearly distinguishable” from Stroud v. … review or to increase the sentences of prisoners who, by appeal or post-conviction proceedings, had unsuccessfully sought a new trial would violate not only their right to the equal protection of the law but also their immunity

Norton v. North Carolina Railroad

122 N.C. 910 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 12, 1898

Railway companies cannot expect this immunity so long as their tracks cross the highways of the country upon the same level. … For this reason we have quoted from it so extensively, and may add that it not only commands respect from the high source from which it comes and the ability with which it is written, but that the principles therein so clearly

Waters v. Qualified Personnel, Inc.

294 N.C. 200 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 24, 1978

Leon Turner individually and for defendant Qualified Personnel, Inc., was attached to the complaint as Exhibit “A”. … Clearly Judge Long’s order was interlocutory. It contemplated further proceedings on the summary judgment question at the trial level.

Pedrick v. . R. R.

143 N.C. 486 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 22, 1906

This Court is always reluctant to stay the progress of such enterprises, and will only do so in a case clearly calling for its intervention." … They receive no license or immunity by the refusal of this Court to interfere with them on this application." There is another view of the case pressed upon our attention.

State v. Welch

316 N.C. 578 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 6, 1986

(3) that taking a sample of defendant's blood without a search warrant violated rights guaranteed by the fourth amendment, (4) that the evidence presented was insufficient to support his conviction, and (5) that "death qualifying … In his final assignment of error, the defendant contends that use of a "death qualified" jury during the guilt determination phase of his trial denied him due process and his right to trial by jury.

Flippin v. Jarrell

301 N.C. 108 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 7, 1980

It is well established that the legislature may, without affecting vested interests, shorten or extend a pre-existing period of limitation. Wilson v. … As a qualification it must stand or fall with that which it qualifies.

Havens v. Bank of Tarboro

132 N.C. 214 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 24, 1903

As the principle governing in such cases is so clearly and forcibly stated in the case of McNeill v. Bank, 46 N. Y., 325 ; 7 Am. … exercised are not expressed on the face of the instrument, but remain in confidence between the owner and the depositary, the case cannot be distinguished in principle from that of an agent who receives secret instructions qualifying