Case law

Blevins v. Town of West Jefferson

361 N.C. 578 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 12, 2007

In Re Montaldo Corp.

207 B.R. 112 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jan 3, 1997

In doing so, Congress expressly overruled two Supreme Court cases, United States v. Embassy Restaurant, 359 U.S. 29 , 79 S.Ct. 554 , 3 L.Ed.2d 601 (1958), and Joint Industry Board v. … Similarly, Joint Industry Board v. United States, supra, involved contributions owed by the debtor/employer to an employees’ annuity plan established by a collective bargaining contract.

Roberts v. . Saunders

192 N.C. 191 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 22, 1926

This idea is thus expressed by Justice Brown in Shuford v. Brady, 169 N. … Heath v. Cotton Mills, 115 N. C., 202 ; Strain v. Fitzgerald 130 N. C., 600 .

Adkins v. STANLY COUNTY BD. OF EDUC.

692 S.E.2d 470 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 4, 2010

See Wood v. … Pratt v.

Rogers v. . Clements

92 N.C. 81 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 5, 1885

This declaration was admitted to show non-payment by that obligor, it being necessary to prove non-payment by both in order to remove the presumption as to each under the ruling in Campbell v. Brown, 86 N. … The separate acknowledgment of one debtor *86 that he has not paid the debt is insufficient to charge him even, unless it is also shown that none of the others had made payment In Campbell v. Brown, 86 N.

Miller v. . London

60 N.C. 628 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 5, 1864

See, among other cases, Lea v. Brown , 56 N.C. 141 . The residuary clause in favor of the testator's wife is shown, by the same case of Lea v. … Kirkpatrick v. Rogers , 42 N.C. 44 ; Swann v. Swann , 58 N.C. 299 .

In re R.D.

795 S.E.2d 831 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 7, 2017

Cynthia Brown, the medical director of the child safety team at Mission Children's Hospital. The trial court tendered Dr. Brown as an expert in the field of child abuse. Dr. Brown examined Ray on 1 December 2015. … Brown, but Dr. Brown testified none of the explanations were sufficient to explain the tibia fracture. Dr.

Duncan v. City of Charlotte

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

Brown v. Aluminum Co., 224 N.C. 766 , 32 S.E. 2d 320 ; Wilson v. Mooresville, 222 N.C. 283 , 22 S.E. 2d 907 ; Neely v. Statesville, 212 N.C. 365 , 193 S.E. 664 ; and Rewis v. Ins. … Ferguson, 202 N.C. 446 , 163 S.E. 688 ; Edgerton v. Hood, Comr. of Banks, 205 N.C. 816 , 172 S.E. 481 ; S. v. Sasseen, 206 N.C. 644 , 175 S.E. 142 ; Brown v. Comrs. of Richmond County, 223 N.C. 744 , 28 S.E. 2d 104 .

Central Telephone Co. v. Tolson

174 N.C. App. 554 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 15, 2005

It is a “well-settled rule that a statute’s constitutionality shall be determined by the judiciary, not an administrative board.” Meads v. … Bailey v. State, 330 N.C. 227, 235 , 412 S.E.2d 295, 300 (1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 911 , 118 L. Ed. 2d 547 (1992), overruled in part on other grounds by Bailey v.

Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co. v. Mecklenburg County

181 N.C. 386 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 18, 1921

Comrs. v. Boring, 175 N. C., 105 ; Lowery v. School Trustees, 140 N. C., 33 ; Cotton Mills v. Waxhaw, 130 N. C., 293 ; Berry v. Haines, 4 N. … S. v. Stokes, at present term, citing S. v. Burnett, 179 N. C., 735 ; Smith v. Wilkins, 164 N. C., 136 ; Efland v. R. R., 146 N. C., 135 ; Ins. Co. v. Daggs, 172 U. S., 557 ; Tullis v. R. R., 175 U. S., 348 -353.

Kee v. . Dillingham

229 N.C. 262 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 29, 1948

. *266 Fields v. Brown, 160 N. C., 295 , 76 S. E., 8 . The rule is well stated in 9 Am. … E. (2d), 484 ; Yarn Co. v. Mauney, 228 N. C., 99 , 44 S. E. (2d), 601 ; McNeill v. McNeill, 223 N. C., 178 (182), 25 S. E. (2d), 615 ; Spencer v. Brown, 214 N. C., 114 , 198 S.

In Re Will of Gilkey

256 N.C. 415 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 28, 1962

(N.S.) 842; In re Sheppard’s Will, 128 N.C. 54 ; Alston v. Davis, 118 N.C. 202 ; Winstead v. Bowman, 68 N.C. 170 ; Hughes v. Smith, 64 N.C. 493 ; Hill v. Bell, 61 N.C. 122 ; Simms v. Simms, 27 N.C. 684 . … Neither Little v. Lockman, 49 N.C. 494 , nor Adams v. Clark, 53 N.C. 56 , relied upon by caveator, support her contention. In Little v.

Mayo v. North Carolina State University

168 N.C. App. 503 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 15, 2005

Capital Outdoor, Inc. v. Guilford County Board of Adjustment, 152 N.C. App. 474, 475 , 567 S.E.2d 440, 441 (2002). … State University Board of Trustees.”

State v. Grimmett

54 N.C. App. 494 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 17, 1981

The reasonableness requirement for seizures that are less intrusive than traditional arrests are (a) that they be supported by articulable and objective facts, Brown v. … In Brown v. Texas, two police officers approached Brown as he was coming out of an alley in a “high drug problem area” and requested identification.

State Ex Rel. Lippard v. Roseman

70 N.C. 34 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 5, 1874

The facts of this case do not materially differ 'from those stated in the opinion of the Court in the preceding case of Armfield v. … Brown. *35 As we there held that ch. §9, sec. 2, of the acts of 1866-’67 by virtue of which, a trial 'by jury was demanded, had been .repealed, that case is decisive of this and for the reasons there ■stated, the judgment

Baker v. Town of Rose Hill

126 N.C. App. 338 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 20, 1997

Concrete Co. v. Board of Commissioners, 299 N.C. 620, 626 , 265 S.E.2d 379, 383 , rehearing denied, 300 N.C. 562 , 270 S.E.2d 106 (1980). … CG & T Corp. v. Bd. of Adjustment of Wilmington, 105 N.C. App. 32, 40 , 411 S.E.2d 655, 660 (1992).

Parks v. . Commissioners

186 N.C. 490 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 21, 1923

McIntire v. R. R. , 67 N.C. 278 . See S. v. Lyle , 100 N.C. 503 ; R. R. v. McCaskill , 94 N.C. 746 ; Allen v. R. R. , 102 N.C. 381 . … Greenville , 154 N.C. 490 ; Rosenthal v. Goldsboro , 149 N.C. 128 ; Small v. Edenton , 146 N.C. 527 ; Ward v. Comrs. , 146 N.C. 534 ; Durham v. Rigsbee , 141 N.C. 128 ; Tate v. Greensboro , 114 N.C. 392 ; Brodnax v.

State v. Walker

662 S.E.2d 392 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 10, 2008

662 S.E.2d 392 (2008) STATE of North Carolina v. Jason Christopher WALKER and Emit E. Browning, Jr. and Javier A. Hernandez, Jr. No. 16P05-3. Supreme Court of North Carolina. April 10, 2008. Robert C. … Brian Michael Aus, Durham, for Browning. Daniel L. Pollitt, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Walker. Geoffrey W. Hosford, Wilmington, for Hernandez. Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 654 S.E.2d 722 .

Pridgen v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad

203 N.C. 62 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 15, 1932

Brown v. R. R., 202 N. C., 256; Phifer v. Berry, 202 N. C., 388. … The standards prescribed for determining whether the proposed newly discovered evidence will warrant a new trial are contained in Brown v. Sheets, 197 N. C., 268 , 148 S. E., 233 .

Wearn v. North Carolina Railroad

191 N.C. 575 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 14, 1926

R. v. Olive, 142 N. C., 257 ; Earnhardt v. R. R., 157 N. C., 358 ; Hendrix v. R. R., 162 N. C., 9 ; R. R. v. Bunting, 168 N. C., 580 ; Tighe v. R. R., 176 N. C., 239 . … Carter v. White, 101 N. C., 30 ; Cox v. McGowan, 116 N. C., 131 ; Potter v. Bonner, 174 N. C., 20 .