Case law

Smith v. City of Wilmington

98 N.C. 343 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 5, 1887

(Perry v. Whitaker , 71 N.C. 475 ; Southerland v. Goldsboro , 96 N.C. 49 ; Duke v. Brown, ibid. , 127; McDowell v. Construction Co., ibid. , 514, and Wood v. Oxford , 97 N.C. 227 , cited.) … Southerland v. Goldsboro , 96 N.C. 49 ; Duke v. Brown, ibid. , 127; McDowell v. The Construction Co., ibid. , 514; Wood v. Oxford , 97 N.C. 227 . The registration of voters is essential and very important.

State v. Avent

253 N.C. 580 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 20, 1961

.); Goff v. Savage, 210 P. 374 (Wash.); De La Ysla v. Publix Theatres Corporation, 26 P. 2d 818 (Utah); Brown v. Meyer Sanitary Milk Co., 96 P. 2d 651 (Kan.); Horn v. Illinois Cent. R. … In S. v.

State to the Use of the Board of Education v. . Moody

74 N.C. 77 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 5, 1876

Monsour v. North Carolina State Board of Alcoholic Control

5 N.C. App. 482 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 23, 1969

In Freeman v. … Campbell v. ABC Board, 263 N.C. 224 , 139 S.E. 2d 197 ; Thomas v. ABC Board, 258 N.C. 513 , 128 S.E. 2d 884 .

New Alliance Party v. North Carolina State Board of Elections

697 F. Supp. 904 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Aug 16, 1988

As stated in Williams v. … (citation omitted) Defendants rely on Jenness v.

State to the Use of the Board of Education v. . Moody

74 N.C. 76 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 5, 1876

Browning-Ferris Industries of South Atlantic, Inc. v. Guilford County Board of Adjustment

126 N.C. App. 168 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 6, 1997

Browning-Ferris Industries of South Atlantic, Inc. … BFI argues that the Board “misapplied the vested rights standard and erred as a matter of law.” Accordingly, this Court’s review of the Board’s decision is de novo. Ballas v. Town of Weaverville, 121 N.C.

Horner Military School v. Rogers

167 N.C. 270 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 11, 1914

BrowN, J. This action is brought to recover the tuition charges for defendant’s two sons. … The law implies that the board and lodging to be furnished by plaintiff must be clean, decent, and reasonably wholesome.

Moore v. Idealease of Wilmington

358 B.R. 248 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Aug 8, 2006

“The Rooker-Feldman doctrine provides that ‘a United States District Court has no authority to review final judgments of a state court in judicial proceedings.’ ” Brown & Root, Inc. v. … Brown & Root, 211 F.3d at 198 .

Caudill v. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF GREENSBORO

166 N.C. App. 279 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 7, 2004

. § 160A-388(e) (2003), an "aggrieved party" may appeal decisions of the Board of Adjustment to superior court by filing a petition for writ of certiorari. See Heery v. Town of Highlands Board of Adjustment, 61 N.C. … Green, Jr., The Zoning Board of Adjustment in North Carolina 78 (2d ed. 1984) (citing Pigford v. Bd. of Adjustment, 49 N.C.

Morgan v. Town of Tarboro

174 N.C. 104 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 26, 1917

Brown, J. Tbe town of Tarboro owns a “Town Common,” or park conveyed to it in 1760 by Joseph .ILowell, lying on tbe east and west side of Main Street. … This is the only reference to the matter in the minutes of the board of commissioners, and the only authority delegated by the board. Later, Mr.

Jones v. Commissioners.

137 N.C. 579 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 28, 1905

Brown, J., concurring. I desire to express a few words of approval of the forcible opinion written by Justice Hoke on behalf of a majority of the Court upon the rehearing of this case. … My attention was first drawn to its importance by the exhaustive, and to my mind conclusive, dissenting opinion of Justice Connor in Bank v. Commissioners, involving the same questions, 135 N. C., 230 .

Evans v. Evans

169 N.C. App. 358 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 5, 2005

Browning v. Helff, 136 N.C. App. 420, 423 , 524 S.E.2d 95, 97 (2000). … Id. at 646 , 290 S.E.2d at 668 ; Dixon v. Dixon, 67 N.C. App. 73, 76 , 312 S.E.2d 669, 671-72 (1984). Conclusions of law, however, are reviewable de novo. Browning, 136 N.C. App. at 423 , 524 S.E.2d at 98 .

Cooke v. . Cooke

164 N.C. 272 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 3, 1913

BROWN, J., concurring; WALKER, J., dissenting; ALLEN, J., concurring in dissenting opinion. … Evans v. Evans , 43 Minn. 31 ; Edgerly v. Edgerly , 112 Mass. 53 ; Green v. Green , L. R. Courts, Pro. Div., 121; Mason v. Mason , L. R., Pro. Div., 121.

Clark v. . Traction Co.

138 N.C. 77 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 11, 1905

Brown, J. … Dudley v. Cable Co., 13 F. R., 129; Terminal Co. v. Morris, 44 S. E., 720 ; Akersloot v. Ry. Co., 15 L. R. A. (N. Y.) 489. In Akersloot v. Ry.

Comrs. v. . Comrs.

121 N.C. 295 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 5, 1897

*Page 235 The chairman of the plaintiff board of commissioners procured a physician and board and nursing at a private house for Beck until he was able to be removed, when the plaintiff board ordered him to be carried to … The question was considered and decided by this Court in Comrs. v. Comrs. , 101 N.C. 520 . Upon the principle of that case, the plaintiff in this case is entitled to recover on the record before us. Reversed. (297)

Pullen v. . Raleigh

68 N.C. 451 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 5, 1873

Pullen and others, plaintiffs, v . The Board of Com'rs of the City of Raleigh, Defendants. … Murfreesboro , 96 N.C. 321 ; Winston v. Taylor , 99 N.C. 213 ; Plymouth v. Cooper , 135 N.C. 7 ; Charlotte v. Brown , 165 N.C. 437 . Overruled: Redmond v. Commissioners , 106 N.C. 127 . *Page 315 (457)

Toomer v. Branch Banking and Trust Co.

171 N.C. App. 58 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 21, 2005

Plaintiffs Tracy Powell Toomer, Andrea Powell Keefe, and Erica Renee Clark are the children of the late Joan Brown Williamson, who died testate on 30 April 1982. … Stat. § 1-52 (1) (2003). 1 See Tyson v.

Virginia-Carolina Farms Co. v. Board of Drainage Commissioners

178 N.C. 661 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 20, 1919

Sanderlin v. Lukens, 152 N. C., 738 ; Newby v. Drainage Dist., 163 N. C., 24 ; Shelton v. White, 163 N. C., 90 ; In re Big Cold Water D. D., 162 N. C., 127 ; Banks v. Lane, 170 N. C., 14 ; Banks v. Lane, 171 N. … It is provided expressly that “after the district shall have been established, and the board of drainage commissioners appointed, it shall be the duty of the board of drainage commissioners to refund to each of the petitioners

McGladrey & Pullen, LLP v. North Carolina State Board of Certified Public Accountant Examiners

360 N.C. 399 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 7, 2006