Case law

Peed v. Burleson's, Inc.

244 N.C. 437 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 19, 1956

Brown had no title to or interest in the potatoes. Hence, defendants acquired none by their purported purchase. Wilson v. Finance Co., 239 N.C. 349, 356 , 79 S.E. 2d 908 , and cases cited. … Pinkston alone dealt with Brown. Defendant corporation received and handled the potatoes. See Lavecchia v. Land Bank, 215 N.C. 73 , 1 S.E. 2d 119 .

State v. . Williams

153 N.C. 595 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 21, 1910

Brown, J., after stating the case. … It is true that in People v. Mayer, 84 N. Y.

Quail Valley Apartments Investors, LP v. Brown

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Feb 6, 2020

See Merrell Dow Parm., Inc. v. … V.

Ehrenhaus v. Baker

243 N.C. App. 17 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 15, 2015

The agreement also included a “fiduciary out” provision that required the Board to submit the proposed merger for a vote even if the Board was no longer recommending it. Id. … The Board voted unanimously to approve the proposed merger, and the Federal Reserve System’s board of governors approved the merger shortly thereafter. Id. at 66, 717 S.E.2d at 15.

Automobile Dealer Resources, Inc. v. Occidental Life Insurance

15 N.C. App. 634 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 23, 1972

Board of Trade, 259 N.C. 692 , 131 S.E. 2d 483 , and will ordinarily be granted only where the injury is immediate, pressing, irreparable, and clearly established. Highway Com. v. Brown, 238 N.C. 293 , 77 S.E. 2d 780 . … See also Huggins v. Board of Education, 272 N.C. 33 , 157 S.E. 2d 703 ; Annot. Preliminary Mandatory Injunction, 15 A.L.R. 2d 213 .

Nichols v. . Edenton

125 N.C. 12 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 10, 1899

Action for $37.50, the salary of plaintiff as one of the board of councilmen of defendant. This amount is conceded, if plaintiff is entitled to recover. … This is his right and the board of councilmen are powerless to divest him of it by any resolution. Affirmed.

Hall v. . Quinn

190 N.C. 326 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 21, 1925

Hunter v. Murfee, 126 Ala., 123 ; Fitzgerald v. Modoc County, 44 L. R. A. (N. S.), (Cal.), 1229; Wright v. Board of Education, 152 S. W., 543 ; Forman v. Safe & Trust Co., 80 At. (Md.), 298; Brown v. Caldwell, 48 A. R. … V.), 376; Highbee v. Rodeman, 28 N. E. (Ind.), 442; Raley v. Umatilla County, 3 A. S. R., 142. In Rawson v.

Raleigh Improvement Co. v. Andrews

176 N.C. 280 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 23, 1918

Brown, J. The following written contract was entered into by the late Col. A. B. … Dorman v. R. R., 7 Fla., 281 ; R. R. v. Bailey, 18 Ohio St., 208 .

Angel v. Ward

43 N.C. App. 288 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 16, 1979

In Cline v. Brown, 24 N.C. … Ponder v. Cobb, supra; Ramsey v. Cheek, supra; Cline v. Brown, supra; 50 Am. Jur. 2d, Libel and Slander, § 219, pp. 730-31.

McGhee v. Bank of America Corp.

173 N.C. App. 422 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 20, 2005

(quoting Anderson v. Lincoln Constr. Co., 265 N.C. 431, 433-34 , 144 S.E.2d 272, 274 (1965)). … Taylor v. J.P. Stevens Co., 307 N.C. 392, 397 , 298 S.E.2d 681, 683 (1983).

Denning-Boyles v. WCES, INC.

123 N.C. App. 409 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 6, 1996

Brown v. Burlington Industries, Inc., 93 N.C. … Brown, 93 N.C. App. at 437 , 378 S.E.2d at 236 (quoting Equipment Co. v. Anders, 265 N.C. 393, 401 , 144 S.E.2d 252, 258 (1965)).

Richardson v. City of Greensboro

174 N.C. 540 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 14, 1917

Brown, J. The purpose of this proceeding is to compel the defendants to furnish plaintiff water and sewerage service on what is known as the flat rate. … Powell v. Duluth, 91 Minn., 53 ; Steward v. Water Co., 90 Col., 635 ; Bldg. Co. v. Water Co., 90 Va., 83 , and by this Court in Horner v. Electric Co., 153 N. C., 535 .

Jackson v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg B.O.E.

North Carolina Industrial Commission · Oct 18, 1995

. § 143-300.1 (a); Huff v. Northampton County Board of Education , 259 N.C. 75 , 130 S.E.2d 26 (1963). 2. The evidence is clear that Corey Neal did not reduce speed to avoid an accident. … See, Tyndall v. Hines , 226 N.C. 620 , 39 S.E.2d 828 (1946); Hicks v. Reavis , 78 N.C. App. 315 , 337 S.E.2d 121 (1985); Brandis, N.C. Evidence , § 131 (3rd Ed. 1993). 3.

Sandlin v. City of Wilmington

185 N.C. 257 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 4, 1923

of health for New Hanover County, and that said board of health was vested with full authority to enact rules and regulations for the preservation of *259 health., and to enforce the same, and the defendant had no control … Von Glahn v. De Rossett, 76 N. C., 292 ; Moore v. Hobbs, 77 N. C., 66 ; Davison v. Gregory, 132 N. C., 389 ; Wood v. Kincaid, 144 N. C., 393 ; Wilcox v. R. R., 152 N. C., 317 ; Besseliew v. Brown, 177 N.

Judkins v. Veterans Administration

415 F. Supp. 2d 613 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Nov 28, 2005

(citing Willis v. Brown, 6 Vet.App. 433, 435-36 (1994)). … See Hicks v. Veterans Admin., 961 F.2d 1367, 1369-70 (8th Cir.1992); see also Beamon v. Brown, 125 F.3d 965, 972-74 (6th Cir.1997); Zuspann v. Brown, 60 F.3d 1156, 1158-60 (5th Cir.1995).

Commissioners v. . MacDonald

148 N.C. 125 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 29, 1908

BROWN, J., concurring arguendo . CONNOR, J., dissenting; HOKE, J., concurring in dissenting opinion. … Board of Education v. Commrs. , 107 N.C. 110 . It does not appear in this record that it will be necessary to levy taxes in excess of the constitutional limitation to meet the interest on these bonds.

State v. Young

249 N.C. App. 683 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 4, 2016

Richmond told him that Defendant "was staying with a woman in a boarding house on Story Street in Burlington." … State v. Smith , 186 N.C.

MORIELLO v. BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 29, 2024

Plaintiff Rebecca Moriello initiated this action against the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA” or “Board”), Merrick Garland, in his official capacity as United States Attorney General, and United States … Lux v.

In re the Proposed Foreclosure of Claim of Lien

366 N.C. 252 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 5, 2012

See, e.g., James River Equip., Inc. v. Tharpe’s Excavating, Inc., 179 N.C. … See, e.g., Pue v. Hood, 222 N.C. 310, 313 , 22 S.E.2d 896, 898 (1942); Brown v. Woodrun Ass’n, 157 N.C.

In re Clark

202 N.C. App. 151 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 2, 2010

Co. v. Bourlon, 172 N.C. App. 595, 601 , 617 S.E.2d 40, 45 (2005)). … Stat. § 34A-1241 predicated on the logic underlying this Court’s decision in City Finance Co. v. Boykin, 86 N.C. App. 446 , 358 S.E.2d 83 (1987); see also Hill v. Jones, 26 N.C. App. 168 , 215 S.E.2d 40 (1973).