inflexible rule in North Carolina

1954All this is subject, however, to the inflexible rule that the intention must be gathered from the entire instrument ‘after looking’ as the phrase is, ‘at the four corners of it.’ ” This rule, variously expressed, is followed throughout subsequent decisions of this Court, — among which are these: Featherston v. Merrimon, 148 N.C. 199 , 61 S.E. 675 ; Triplett v. Williams, 149 N.C. 394 , 63 S.E. 79 ; Price v. Griffin, 150 N.C. 523 , 64 S.E. 372 ; Thomas v. Bunch, 158 N.C. 175 , 73 S.E. 899 ; Acker v. Pridgen, 158 N.C. 337 , 74 S.E. 335 ; Williamson v. Bitting, 159 N.C. 321 , 74 S.E. 808 ; Eason v

1954All this is subject, however, to the inflexible rule that the intention must be gathered from the entire instrument ‘after looking’ as the phrase is, ‘at the four corners of it.’ ” This rule, variously expressed, is followed throughout subsequent decisions of this Court, — among which are these: Featherston v. Merrimon, 148 N.C. 199 , 61 S.E. 675 ; Triplett v. Williams, 149 N.C. 394 , 63 S.E. 79 ; Price v. Griffin, 150 N.C. 523 , 64 S.E. 372 ; Thomas v. Bunch, 158 N.C. 175 , 73 S.E. 899 ; Acker v. Pridgen, 158 N.C. 337 , 74 S.E. 335 ; Williamson v. Bitting, 159 N.C. 321 , 74 S.E. 808 ; Eason v

1934This is an inflexible rule, and it is not because there is, but because there may be fraud.’ Gibson v. Barbour, 100 N. C., 192 ; Froneberger v. Lewis, 79 N. C., 426 ; Cole v. Stokes, 113 N. C., 270 .” In Owens v. Mfg.

1934This is an inflexible rule, and it is not because there is, but because there may be fraud.' Gibson v. Barbour , 100 N.C. 192 ; Froneberger v. Lewis , 79 N.C. 426 ; Cole v. Stokes , 113 N.C. 270 ." In Owens v. Mfg.

1915All this is subject, however, to the inflexible rule that the intention must be gathered from the entire instrument, 'after looking,’ as the phrase is, 'at the four corners of it.’ ” This was approved in Bryan v. Eason, 147 N. C., 284 ; Triplett v. Williams, 149 N. C., 394 ; Beacom v. Amos, 161 N. C., 357 .

1915All this is subject, however, to the inflexible rule that the intention must be gathered from the entire instrument, `after looking,' as the phrase is `at the four corners of it.'" This was approved in Bryan v. Eason , 147 N.C. 284 ; Triplett v. Williams , 149 N.C. 394 ; Beacom v. Amos , *Page 373 161 N.C. 357 .

1942R. , 167 N.C. 290 ; Barrow v. Ins.

1942R., 167 N. C., 290 ; Barrow v. Ins.

1942But it is not an inflexible rule, and it is frequently relaxed in the admission of evidence as to ultimate facts in regard to matters of science, art, or skill, as may be seen by reference to Holder v. Lumber Co. , 161 N.C. 177 ; Ferebee v. R.

1942But it is not an inflexible rule, and it is frequently relaxed in the admission of evidence as to ultimate facts in regard to matters of science, art, or skill, as may be seen by reference to Holder v. Lumber Co., 161 N. C., 177 ; Ferebee v. R.

1934This is an inflexible rule, and it is not because there is, but because there may be fraud.’ Gibson v. Barbour, 100 N. C., 192 ; Froneberger v. Lewis, 79 N. C., 426 ; Cole v. Stokes, 113 N. C., 270 .” In Owens v. Mfg.

1934This is an inflexible rule, and it is not because there is, but because there may be fraud.' Gibson v. Barbour , 100 N.C. 192 ; Froneberger v. Lewis , 79 N.C. 426 ; Cole v. Stokes , 113 N.C. 270 ." In Owens v. Mfg.

1934We think the principle of law relied on by the referee, sound in principle and the law of this jurisdiction as set forth in Gibson v. Barbour, 100 N. C., 192 (197-198) : “‘It is an inflexible rule/ are the words of the late Chief Justice, an Associate Justice when they were uttered, ‘that when a trustee buys at his own sale, even if he gives a fair price, the cestui que trust has his election to treat the sale as a nullity, not because there is, but because there may be, fraud.

1934This is an inflexible rule, and it is not because there is, but because there may be fraud.’ Gibson v. Barbour, 100 N. C., 192 ; Froneberger v. Lewis, 79 N. C., 426 ; Cole v. Stokes, 113 N. C., 270 .” In Owens v. Mfg.

1954All this is subject, however, to the inflexible rule that the intention must be gathered from the entire instrument ‘after looking’ as the phrase is, ‘at the four corners of it.’ ” This rule, variously expressed, is followed throughout subsequent decisions of this Court, — among which are these: Featherston v. Merrimon, 148 N.C. 199 , 61 S.E. 675 ; Triplett v. Williams, 149 N.C. 394 , 63 S.E. 79 ; Price v. Griffin, 150 N.C. 523 , 64 S.E. 372 ; Thomas v. Bunch, 158 N.C. 175 , 73 S.E. 899 ; Acker v. Pridgen, 158 N.C. 337 , 74 S.E. 335 ; Williamson v. Bitting, 159 N.C. 321 , 74 S.E. 808 ; Eason v

1954All this is subject, however, to the inflexible rule that the intention must be gathered from the entire instrument ‘after looking’ as the phrase is, ‘at the four corners of it.’ ” This rule, variously expressed, is followed throughout subsequent decisions of this Court, — among which are these: Featherston v. Merrimon, 148 N.C. 199 , 61 S.E. 675 ; Triplett v. Williams, 149 N.C. 394 , 63 S.E. 79 ; Price v. Griffin, 150 N.C. 523 , 64 S.E. 372 ; Thomas v. Bunch, 158 N.C. 175 , 73 S.E. 899 ; Acker v. Pridgen, 158 N.C. 337 , 74 S.E. 335 ; Williamson v. Bitting, 159 N.C. 321 , 74 S.E. 808 ; Eason v

1918All this is subject, however, to the inflexible rule that the intention must be gathered from the entire instrument “after looking,” as the phrase is, “at the four corners of it.” See Real Estate Co. v. Bland, 152 N. C., 225 ; Puckett v. Morgan, 158 N. C., 344 .

1918All this is subject, however, to the inflexible rule that the intention must be gathered from the entire instrument "after looking," as the phrase is, "at the four corners of it." See Real Estate Co. v. Bland , 152 N.C. 225 ; Puckett v. Morgan , 158 N.C. 344 .

1918All this is subject, however, to the inflexible rule that the intention must be gathered from the entire instrument “after looking,” as the phrase is, “at the four corners of it.” See Real Estate Co. v. Bland, 152 N. C., 225 ; Puckett v. Morgan, 158 N. C., 344 .

1918All this is subject, however, to the inflexible rule that the intention must be gathered from the entire instrument "after looking," as the phrase is, "at the four corners of it." See Real Estate Co. v. Bland , 152 N.C. 225 ; Puckett v. Morgan , 158 N.C. 344 .

1938(Christenburg v. King, 85 N. C., 230 ), quoted with approval by Hoke, J., in McCoy v. Lumber Co., 149 N. C., 1 (4), the rule of this jurisdiction is : “ ‘It is well settled as an inflexible rule, that where both parties claim under the same person, neither of them can deny his right, and then, as between them, the elder is the better title and must prevail.

1911McCoy v. Lumber Co., 149 N. C., 1 ; Sample v. Lumber Co., 150 N. C., 161 ; Foy v. Lumber Co., 152 N. C., 595 .

1934Co., 168 N. C., 397 (399) : “In exercising such a right, however, the utmost degree of good faith is required, the mortgagee being looked upon as a trustee for the owner as well as the creditor, and, in applying the principle, it is very generally held that such a mortgagee is not allowed, either directly or indirectly, to become the purchaser at his own sale, and where this is made to appear the transaction, as between the parties and at the election of the mortgagor, is ineffective as a foreclosure, and the relationship of mortgagor and mortgagee will continue to exist.

1934Co. , 168 N.C. 397 (399): "In exercising such a right, however, the utmost degree of good faith is required, the mortgagee being looked upon as a trustee for the owner as well as the creditor, and, in applying the principle, it is very generally held that such a mortgagee is not allowed, either directly or indirectly, to become the purchaser at his own sale, and where this is made to appear the transaction, as between the parties and at the election of the mortgagor, is ineffective as a foreclosure, and the relationship of mortgagor and mortgagee will continue to exist.

1930A community of interest among defendants is necessary, but it is community of interest in something wider than a precise 'subject of action’ between plaintiff and each defendant — it is a community of interest 'in tbe controversy.’ There is a noticeable tendency under Tbe Code, as in equity pleading, to treat the rule, not as an inflexible rule of practice or procedure, but as a rule founded in general convenience, which rests upon a consideration of what will best promote tbe administration of justice without multiplying unnecessary litigation on tbe one band or drawing suitors into needless

1926A community of interest among defendants is necessary, but it is community of interest in something wider than a precise ‘subject of action’ between plaintiff and each defendant — it is a community of interest ‘in the controversy.’ There is a noticeable tendency under The Code, as in equity pleading, to treat the rule, not as an inflexible rule of practice or procedure, but as a rule founded in general convenience, which rests upon a consideration of what will best promote the administration of justice without multiplying unnecessary litigation on the one hand or drawing suitors into needless

2021See id. § 36C-8-802(b) (stating that a conflict of interest transaction is voidable “without regard to whether the transaction is fair”); Johnston, 269 N.C. at 710–11 (“It is an inflexible rule, that when a trustee buys at his own sale, even if he gives a fair price, the cestui que trust has his election to treat that sale as a nullity, not because there is but because there may be fraud.” (quoting Brothers v. Brothers, 42 N.C. 150, 151 (1850))). 134.

2013Id. at 401–04, 537 S.E.2d at 257–58. {20} Norman also placed some significance on the procedural hurdles attendant to a derivative corporate action, and particularly the inflexible requirement of a pre-litigation demand.

2013Id. at 401–04, 537 S.E.2d at 257–58. {20} Norman also placed some significance on the procedural hurdles attendant to a derivative corporate action, and particularly the inflexible requirement of a pre-litigation demand.

2004Courts have rejected "the proposition that whenever two different supervisors are involved in administering the disciplinary actions, the comparators cannot as a matter of law be similarly situated for Title VII purposes." Anderson v. WBMG-42, 253 F.3d 561 , 565 (11th Cir.2001). "[M]aking an independent determination as to the relevancy of a particular aspect of the plaintiff's employment status and that of the non-protected employee is crucial." Id.

2004Courts have rejected "the proposition that whenever two different supervisors are involved in administering the disciplinary actions, the comparators cannot as a matter of law be similarly situated for Title VII purposes." Anderson v. WBMG-42, 253 F.3d 561 , 565 (11th Cir.2001). "[M]aking an independent determination as to the relevancy of a particular aspect of the plaintiff's employment status and that of the non-protected employee is crucial." Id.

1986It has been described as “an inflexible rule of property which arbitrarily prefers certain formal parts of the deed over the plainly expressed intent of the grantor.” Robinson v. King, 68 N.C.

1986App. 86, 94 , 314 S.E. 2d 768, 773 , cert. denied, 311 N.C. 762 , 321 S.E. 2d 144 (1984).

1986App. 86, 94 , 314 S.E. 2d 768, 773 , cert. denied, 311 N.C. 762 , 321 S.E. 2d 144 (1984).

1983Our pre-Harris case law supports such a holding, as does the law of other jurisdictions. [2] Even so, this Court in State v. Harris, 290 N.C. 718 , 228 S.E.2d 424 , appeared to convert a rule requiring the presence of evidence into a more inflexible rule requiring as a matter of law a second degree murder instruction in every case in which the State relied on premeditation and deliberation.

1983Our pre-Harris case law supports such a holding, as does the law of other jurisdictions. [2] Even so, this Court in State v. Harris, 290 N.C. 718 , 228 S.E.2d 424 , appeared to convert a rule requiring the presence of evidence into a more inflexible rule requiring as a matter of law a second degree murder instruction in every case in which the State relied on premeditation and deliberation.

1967One hundred and seventeen years ago this Court, in the case of Brothers v. Brothers, 42 N.C. 150 , stated: “It is an inflexible rule, *711 that when a trustee buys at his own sale, even if he gives a fair price, the cestui que trust has his election to treat that sale as a nullity, not because there is but because there may he fraud.” In the case of McNeill v. McNeill, 223 N.C. 178 , 25 S.E. 2d 615 , the Court held: “The law is well settled that in certain known and definite ‘fiduciary relations, if there be dealing between the parties, on the complaint of the party in the power of the other,

1967One hundred and seventeen years ago this Court, in the case of Brothers v. Brothers, 42 N.C. 150 , stated: “It is an inflexible rule, *711 that when a trustee buys at his own sale, even if he gives a fair price, the cestui que trust has his election to treat that sale as a nullity, not because there is but because there may he fraud.” In the case of McNeill v. McNeill, 223 N.C. 178 , 25 S.E. 2d 615 , the Court held: “The law is well settled that in certain known and definite ‘fiduciary relations, if there be dealing between the parties, on the complaint of the party in the power of the other,

1967One hundred and seventeen years ago this Court, in the case of Brothers v. Brothers, 42 N.C. 150 , stated: “It is an inflexible rule, *711 that when a trustee buys at his own sale, even if he gives a fair price, the cestui que trust has his election to treat that sale as a nullity, not because there is but because there may he fraud.” In the case of McNeill v. McNeill, 223 N.C. 178 , 25 S.E. 2d 615 , the Court held: “The law is well settled that in certain known and definite ‘fiduciary relations, if there be dealing between the parties, on the complaint of the party in the power of the other,

1967One hundred and seventeen years ago this Court, in the case of Brothers v. Brothers, 42 N.C. 150 , stated: “It is an inflexible rule, *711 that when a trustee buys at his own sale, even if he gives a fair price, the cestui que trust has his election to treat that sale as a nullity, not because there is but because there may he fraud.” In the case of McNeill v. McNeill, 223 N.C. 178 , 25 S.E. 2d 615 , the Court held: “The law is well settled that in certain known and definite ‘fiduciary relations, if there be dealing between the parties, on the complaint of the party in the power of the other,

1956This Court said in Maddox v. Brown, 232 N.C. 542 , 61 S.E. 2d 613—quoted in Ward v. Cruse, 236 N.C. 400 , 72 S.E. 2d 835 : “. . . notwithstanding the provisions of this statute (G.S. 20-149), a motorist may, in the exercise of ordinary care, pass another vehicle, going in the same direction, on the right of the overtaken vehicle when the driver of that vehicle has given a clear signal of his intention to make a left turn and has left sufficient space to the right to permit the overtaking vehicle to pass in safety.” The courts generally hold a motorist on the road is bound to exercise ordinary

1956This Court said in Maddox v. Brown, 232 N.C. 542 , 61 S.E. 2d 613—quoted in Ward v. Cruse, 236 N.C. 400 , 72 S.E. 2d 835 : “. . . notwithstanding the provisions of this statute (G.S. 20-149), a motorist may, in the exercise of ordinary care, pass another vehicle, going in the same direction, on the right of the overtaken vehicle when the driver of that vehicle has given a clear signal of his intention to make a left turn and has left sufficient space to the right to permit the overtaking vehicle to pass in safety.” The courts generally hold a motorist on the road is bound to exercise ordinary

1956Ledbetter v. English, 166 N.C. 125 , 81 S.E. 1066 ; Cooke v. Jerome, 172 N.C. 626 , 90 S.E. 767 ; Anno. 24 A.L.R. pp. 1304 et seq., where the cases are cited.

1956Ledbetter v. English, 166 N.C. 125 , 81 S.E. 1066 ; Cooke v. Jerome, 172 N.C. 626 , 90 S.E. 767 ; Anno. 24 A.L.R. pp. 1304 et seq., where the cases are cited.

1956Ledbetter v. English, 166 N.C. 125 , 81 S.E. 1066 ; Cooke v. Jerome, 172 N.C. 626 , 90 S.E. 767 ; Anno. 24 A.L.R. pp. 1304 et seq., where the cases are cited.

1956Ledbetter v. English, 166 N.C. 125 , 81 S.E. 1066 ; Cooke v. Jerome, 172 N.C. 626 , 90 S.E. 767 ; Anno. 24 A.L.R. pp. 1304 et seq., where the cases are cited.

1956This Court said in Maddox v. Brown, 232 N.C. 542 , 61 S.E. 2d 613—quoted in Ward v. Cruse, 236 N.C. 400 , 72 S.E. 2d 835 : “. . . notwithstanding the provisions of this statute (G.S. 20-149), a motorist may, in the exercise of ordinary care, pass another vehicle, going in the same direction, on the right of the overtaken vehicle when the driver of that vehicle has given a clear signal of his intention to make a left turn and has left sufficient space to the right to permit the overtaking vehicle to pass in safety.” The courts generally hold a motorist on the road is bound to exercise ordinary

1956This Court said in Maddox v. Brown, 232 N.C. 542 , 61 S.E. 2d 613—quoted in Ward v. Cruse, 236 N.C. 400 , 72 S.E. 2d 835 : “. . . notwithstanding the provisions of this statute (G.S. 20-149), a motorist may, in the exercise of ordinary care, pass another vehicle, going in the same direction, on the right of the overtaken vehicle when the driver of that vehicle has given a clear signal of his intention to make a left turn and has left sufficient space to the right to permit the overtaking vehicle to pass in safety.” The courts generally hold a motorist on the road is bound to exercise ordinary

1954All this is subject, however, to the inflexible rule that the intention must be gathered from the entire instrument ‘after looking’ as the phrase is, ‘at the four corners of it.’ ” This rule, variously expressed, is followed throughout subsequent decisions of this Court, — among which are these: Featherston v. Merrimon, 148 N.C. 199 , 61 S.E. 675 ; Triplett v. Williams, 149 N.C. 394 , 63 S.E. 79 ; Price v. Griffin, 150 N.C. 523 , 64 S.E. 372 ; Thomas v. Bunch, 158 N.C. 175 , 73 S.E. 899 ; Acker v. Pridgen, 158 N.C. 337 , 74 S.E. 335 ; Williamson v. Bitting, 159 N.C. 321 , 74 S.E. 808 ; Eason v

1954All this is subject, however, to the inflexible rule that the intention must be gathered from the entire instrument ‘after looking’ as the phrase is, ‘at the four corners of it.’ ” This rule, variously expressed, is followed throughout subsequent decisions of this Court, — among which are these: Featherston v. Merrimon, 148 N.C. 199 , 61 S.E. 675 ; Triplett v. Williams, 149 N.C. 394 , 63 S.E. 79 ; Price v. Griffin, 150 N.C. 523 , 64 S.E. 372 ; Thomas v. Bunch, 158 N.C. 175 , 73 S.E. 899 ; Acker v. Pridgen, 158 N.C. 337 , 74 S.E. 335 ; Williamson v. Bitting, 159 N.C. 321 , 74 S.E. 808 ; Eason v