70 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1824–2026 5 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by North Carolina courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Stricklandgreen2 sentences2012“It is an elementary rule of law that a trial judge is required to declare and explain the law arising on the evidence and to instruct according to the evidence.” State v. Strickland, 307 N.C. 274, 284 , 298 S.E.2d 645, 652 (1983), overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Johnson, 317 N.C. 193 , 344 S.E.2d 775 (1986). “[D]ue process requires an instruction on a lesser-included offense only ‘if the evidence would permit a jury rationally to find [the defendant] guilty of the lesser offense and acquit him of the greater.’ ” State v. Conaway, 339 N.C. 487, 514 , 453 S.E.2d 824, 841 (1995) ( 2012“It is an elementary rule of law that a trial judge is required to declare and explain the law arising on the evidence and to instruct according to the evidence.” State v. Strickland, 307 N.C. 274, 284 , 298 S.E.2d 645, 652 (1983), overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Johnson, 317 N.C. 193 , 344 S.E.2d 775 (1986). “[D]ue process requires an instruction on a lesser-included offense only ‘if the evidence would permit a jury rationally to find [the defendant] guilty of the lesser offense and acquit him of the greater.’ ” State v. Conaway, 339 N.C. 487, 514 , 453 S.E.2d 824, 841 (1995) ( | 3 | 3 |
State v. Shawgreen2 sentences1994The trial judge is not required, however, to instruct the jury on lesser-included offenses “ ‘when there is no evidence to sustain a verdict of defendant’s guilt of such lesser degrees.’ ” Id. (quoting State v. Shaw, 305 N.C. 327, 342 , 289 S.E.2d 325, 333 (1982)). 1994The trial judge is not required, however, to instruct the jury on lesser-included offenses “ ‘when there is no evidence to sustain a verdict of defendant’s guilt of such lesser degrees.’ ” Id. (quoting State v. Shaw, 305 N.C. 327, 342 , 289 S.E.2d 325, 333 (1982)). | 3 | 3 |
Satterfield Ex Rel. Satterfield v. McLellan Stores Co.green2 sentences2021“It is an elementary principle of law that there can be no libel without a publication of the defamatory matter.” Satterfield v. McLellan Stores Co., 215 N.C. 582, 584 , 2 S.E.2d 709, 711 (1939). 2021“It is an elementary principle of law that there can be no libel without a publication of the defamatory matter.” Satterfield v. McLellan Stores Co., 215 N.C. 582, 584 , 2 S.E.2d 709, 711 (1939). | 2 | 2 |
Pittman v. Thomasgreen2 sentences2008"It is an elementary rule in this jurisdiction that the intention of the testator is the polar star which is to guide in the interpretation of all wills, and, when ascertained, effect will be given to it unless it violates some rule of law, or is contrary to public policy." Pittman v. Thomas, 307 N.C. 485, 492 , 299 S.E.2d 207, 211 (1983) (internal quotation omitted). 2008"It is an elementary rule in this jurisdiction that the intention of the testator is the polar star which is to guide in the interpretation of all wills, and, when ascertained, effect will be given to it unless it violates some rule of law, or is contrary to public policy." Pittman v. Thomas, 307 N.C. 485, 492 , 299 S.E.2d 207, 211 (1983) (internal quotation omitted). | 2 | 2 |
Rental Towel & Uniform Service v. Bynum International, Inc.green2 sentences2003The trial court gave Griffis’s last three jury instructions as requested, with the omission of “John Edward Lazarovich.” “It is an elementary principle of law that the trial judge must submit to the jury such issues as are necessary to settle the material controversies raised in the pleadings and supported by the evidence.” Uniform Service v. Bynum International, Inc., 304 N.C. 174, 176 , 282 S.E.2d 426, 428 (1981). 2003The trial court gave Griffis’s last three jury instructions as requested, with the omission of “John Edward Lazarovich.” “It is an elementary principle of law that the trial judge must submit to the jury such issues as are necessary to settle the material controversies raised in the pleadings and supported by the evidence.” Uniform Service v. Bynum International, Inc., 304 N.C. 174, 176 , 282 S.E.2d 426, 428 (1981). | 2 | 2 |
Griffis v. Lazarovichgreen2 sentences2026When a jury serves as factfinder, “[i]t is an elementary principle of law that the trial judge must submit to the jury such issues as are necessary to settle the material controversies raised in the pleadings and supported by the evidence.” Griffis v. Lazarovich, 161 N.C. 2007Defendant argues the trial court erred by refusing to submit to the jury Defendant’s requested issue regarding notice. “ ‘It is an elementary principle of law that the trial judge must submit to the jury such issues as are necessary to settle the material controversies raised in the pleadings and supported by the evidence.’ ” Griffis v. Lazarovich, 161 N.C. | 1 | 2 |
Mowery v. . Mowerygreen2 sentences2025In making his argument, Defendant relies heavily on our Supreme Court’s decision in State v. Gibson, which provided “[i]t is an elementary rule in the criminal law that a defendant must be convicted, if at all, of the particular offense alleged in the bill of indictment.” 169 N.C. 380, 382 , 85 S.E. 7 , 8 (1915). 2000“It is an elementary rule in the criminal law that a defendant must be convicted, if at all, of the particular offense alleged in the bill of indictment.” State v. Gibson, 169 N.C. 318, 320 , 85 S.E. 7, 8 (1915). | 1 | 2 |
Clark v. Connorgreen2 sentences1992When engaging in the troublesome area of interpretation of a will it is, of course, axiomatic, and this Court has stated, that “[i]t is an elementary rule in this jurisdiction ‘that the intention of the testator is the polar star which is to guide in the interpretation of all wills ....’” Pittman v. Thomas, 307 N.C. 485, 492 , 299 S.E.2d 207, 211 (1983) (quoting Clark v. Connor, 253 N.C. 515, 520 , 117 S.E.2d 465, 468 (1960)). 1992When engaging in the troublesome area of interpretation of a will it is, of course, axiomatic, and this Court has stated, that “[i]t is an elementary rule in this jurisdiction ‘that the intention of the testator is the polar star which is to guide in the interpretation of all wills ....’” Pittman v. Thomas, 307 N.C. 485, 492 , 299 S.E.2d 207, 211 (1983) (quoting Clark v. Connor, 253 N.C. 515, 520 , 117 S.E.2d 465, 468 (1960)). | 1 | 2 |
| Skilling v. United Statesgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Hooper v. Californiagreen | 1 | 1 |
| United States v. Harrissgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Conawaygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Beck v. Alabamagreen | 1 | 1 |
| Hayman v. Ramada Inn, Inc.green | 1 | 1 |
| Mobil Oil Corp. v. Commissioner of Taxes of Vt.green | 1 | 1 |
| Chalmers v. Womackgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Campgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Roshelli v. Sperrygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Wallace v. . Bellamygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Manly v. . Abernathygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Johnson v. . R. R.green | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Cobb v. Clegg.
green
2 sentences1917Moffitt v. Maness, 102 N. C., 457 ; Cobb v. Clegg, 137 N. C., 153 ; Basnight v. Jobbing Co., 148 N. C., 356 ; Walker v. Venters, 148 N. C., 389 ; Medicine Co. v. Mizzell, ib., 384; Walker v. Cooper, 150 N. C., 128 ; Woodson v. Beck, 151 N. C., 144 ; Machinery Co. v. McClamrock, 152 N. C., 405 ; and especially Fertilizer Works v. McLawhorn, 158 N. C., 275 .” See, also, Bland v. Harvester Co., supra. There was no evidence of authority upon the part of the agent to waive any provision of the contract and to make an oral agreement. 1915Moffitt v. Maness, 102 N. C., 457 ; Cobb v. Clegg, 137 N. C., 153 ; Basnight v. Jobbing Co., 148 N. C., 356 ; Walker v. Venters, 148 N. C., 389 ; Medicine Co. v. Mizzell, ibid., 384; Walker v. Cooper, 150 N. C., 128 ; Woodson v. Beck, 151 N. C., 144 ; Machinery Co. v. McClamrock, 152 N. C., 405 , and especially Fertilizer Works v. McLawhorn, 158 N. C., 275 . | 5 | 1909–1917 |
Evans v. Freeman.
green
2 sentences1917In the latter case, although that which is written cannot be aided by parol evidence, yet the terms arranged orally may be proved by parol, in which case they supplement the writing, and the whole constitutes one entire contract.” Commenting on that statement of the rule, we said in Evans v. Freeman, supra: “In such a case there is no violation of the familiar and elementary rule we have before mentioned, because in the sense of that rule the written contract is neither contradicted, added to, nor varied; but leaving it in full force and operation as it has been expressed by the parties in the 1913In the latter case, although that which is written cannot be aided by parol evidence, yet the terms arranged orally may be proved by parol, in which case they supplement the writing and the whole constitutes one entire contract." Commenting on this passage, in Evans v. Freeman , 142 N.C. 61 , we said: "In such a case there is no violation of the familiar and elementary rule we have before mentioned (against varying or contradicting a written agreement), because in the sense of that rule the written contract is neither contradicted, added to, nor varied; but leaving it in full force and operati | 5 | 1906–1917 |
Austin v. . Stewart
neutral
2 sentences1980Austin v. Stewart, 126 N.C. 525 . 1976Austin v. Stewart, 126 N.C. 525 .’ See also Breckenridge, ‘Ratification in North Carolina’, 18 N.C. | 4 | 1903–1980 |
Seawell v. . Hall
green
2 sentences1959Such intention, .as a general rule, must be sought in the terms of the instrument; but if the words used leave the intention in doubt, resort may be had to the circumstances ■ attending the execution of .the .instrument .and the situation of the parties at the time —• the tendency of modern decisions being ,to treat all uncertainties in a conveyance as ambiguities to be explained by ascertaining in the manner indicated the intention of the parties.” Seawell v. Hall, 185 N.C. 80, 82 , 116 S.E. 189 . 1959Such intention, .as a general rule, must be sought in the terms of the instrument; but if the words used leave the intention in doubt, resort may be had to the circumstances ■ attending the execution of .the .instrument .and the situation of the parties at the time —• the tendency of modern decisions being ,to treat all uncertainties in a conveyance as ambiguities to be explained by ascertaining in the manner indicated the intention of the parties.” Seawell v. Hall, 185 N.C. 80, 82 , 116 S.E. 189 . | 3 | 1926–1959 |
Woodson v. . Beck
neutral
2 sentences1917Moffitt v. Maness, 102 N. C., 457 ; Cobb v. Clegg, 137 N. C., 153 ; Basnight v. Jobbing Co., 148 N. C., 356 ; Walker v. Venters, 148 N. C., 389 ; Medicine Co. v. Mizzell, ib., 384; Walker v. Cooper, 150 N. C., 128 ; Woodson v. Beck, 151 N. C., 144 ; Machinery Co. v. McClamrock, 152 N. C., 405 ; and especially Fertilizer Works v. McLawhorn, 158 N. C., 275 .” See, also, Bland v. Harvester Co., supra. There was no evidence of authority upon the part of the agent to waive any provision of the contract and to make an oral agreement. 1915Moffitt v. Maness, 102 N. C., 457 ; Cobb v. Clegg, 137 N. C., 153 ; Basnight v. Jobbing Co., 148 N. C., 356 ; Walker v. Venters, 148 N. C., 389 ; Medicine Co. v. Mizzell, ibid., 384; Walker v. Cooper, 150 N. C., 128 ; Woodson v. Beck, 151 N. C., 144 ; Machinery Co. v. McClamrock, 152 N. C., 405 , and especially Fertilizer Works v. McLawhorn, 158 N. C., 275 . | 3 | 1913–1917 |
Moffitt v. . Maness
neutral
2 sentences1917Moffitt v. Maness, 102 N. C., 457 ; Cobb v. Clegg, 137 N. C., 153 ; Basnight v. Jobbing Co., 148 N. C., 356 ; Walker v. Venters, 148 N. C., 389 ; Medicine Co. v. Mizzell, ib., 384; Walker v. Cooper, 150 N. C., 128 ; Woodson v. Beck, 151 N. C., 144 ; Machinery Co. v. McClamrock, 152 N. C., 405 ; and especially Fertilizer Works v. McLawhorn, 158 N. C., 275 .” See, also, Bland v. Harvester Co., supra. There was no evidence of authority upon the part of the agent to waive any provision of the contract and to make an oral agreement. 1916In support of their view they cited Parker v. Morrill, 98 N. C., 232 ; Meekins v. Newberry, 101 N. C., 17 ; Bank v. McElwee, 104 N. C., 305 , and especially relied on Moffitt v. Maness, 102 N. C., 457 , in which the Court, through Shepherd, J admonishes us that the rule against the admissibility of parol testimony to vary the terms of a written instrument has perhaps been relaxed too much, and that the farthest limit has been reached in admitting such testimony, beyond which it will not be safe to go. | 3 | 1915–1917 |
Walker v. . Venters
neutral
2 sentences1913Cobb v. Clegg , 137 N.C. 153 ; Walker v. Cooper , 150 N.C. 129 ; Typewriter Co. v. Hardware Co. , 143 N.C. 97 ; Evans v. Freeman , 142 N.C. 61 ; Walker v. Venters , 148 N.C. 388 ; Basnight v. Jobbing Co., ibid. , 350; Woodson v. Beck , 151 N.C. 144 . 1913Cobb v. Clegg , 137 N.C. 153 ; Walker v. Cooper , 150 N.C. 129 ; Typewriter Co. v. Hardware Co. , 143 N.C. 97 ; Evans v. Freeman , 142 N.C. 61 ; Walker v. Venters , 148 N.C. 388 ; Basnight v. Jobbing Co., ibid. , 350; Woodson v. Beck , 151 N.C. 144 . | 3 | 1909–1913 |
State v. Johnson
green
2 sentences2012“It is an elementary rule of law that a trial judge is required to declare and explain the law arising on the evidence and to instruct according to the evidence.” State v. Strickland, 307 N.C. 274, 284 , 298 S.E.2d 645, 652 (1983), overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Johnson, 317 N.C. 193 , 344 S.E.2d 775 (1986). “[D]ue process requires an instruction on a lesser-included offense only ‘if the evidence would permit a jury rationally to find [the defendant] guilty of the lesser offense and acquit him of the greater.’ ” State v. Conaway, 339 N.C. 487, 514 , 453 S.E.2d 824, 841 (1995) ( 2012“It is an elementary rule of law that a trial judge is required to declare and explain the law arising on the evidence and to instruct according to the evidence.” State v. Strickland, 307 N.C. 274, 284 , 298 S.E.2d 645, 652 (1983), overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Johnson, 317 N.C. 193 , 344 S.E.2d 775 (1986). “[D]ue process requires an instruction on a lesser-included offense only ‘if the evidence would permit a jury rationally to find [the defendant] guilty of the lesser offense and acquit him of the greater.’ ” State v. Conaway, 339 N.C. 487, 514 , 453 S.E.2d 824, 841 (1995) ( | 2 | 1994–2012 |
State Ex Rel. Utilities Commission v. General Telephone Co. of the Southeast
green
2 sentences1978Utilities Commission v. Merchandising Corp., 288 N.C. 715 , 220 S.E.2d 304 (1975); Utilities Commission v. Telephone Co., 281 N.C. 318, 336 , 189 S.E.2d 705 (1972); Utilities Commission v. R. 1978Utilities Commission v. Merchandising Corp., 288 N.C. 715 , 220 S.E.2d 304 (1975); Utilities Commission v. Telephone Co., 281 N.C. 318, 336 , 189 S.E.2d 705 (1972); Utilities Commission v. R. | 2 | 1978–1978 |
State Ex Rel. Utilities Commission v. National Merchandising Corp.
green
2 sentences1978Utilities Commission v. Merchandising Corp., 288 N.C. 715 , 220 S.E.2d 304 (1975); Utilities Commission v. Telephone Co., 281 N.C. 318, 336 , 189 S.E.2d 705 (1972); Utilities Commission v. R. 1978Utilities Commission v. Merchandising Corp., 288 N.C. 715 , 220 S.E.2d 304 (1975); Utilities Commission v. Telephone Co., 281 N.C. 318, 336 , 189 S.E.2d 705 (1972); Utilities Commission v. R. | 2 | 1978–1978 |
Williams v. . Williams
neutral
2 sentences1941Seawell v. Hall, 185 N. C., 80 ; Lumber Co. v. Herrington, 183 N. C., 85 ; Pugh v. Allen, 179 N. C., 307 ; Williams v. Williams, 175 N. C., 160 ; Springs v. Hopkins, 171 N. C., 486 .” In Buckner v. Maynard, 198 N. C., 802 , it was held: “While ordinarily and standing alone an estate conveyed by deed to ‘R and children, her bodily heirs and assigns,’ would carry a fee-simple estate to R, it will not so operate when taking the deed in its entirety, the intent of the grantor is ascertained to convey the lands to E and ber children as tenants in common, and such intent is in conformity with like e 1926Seawell v. Hall, 185 N. C., 80 ; Lumber Co. v. Herrington, 183 N. C., 85 ; Pugh v. Allen, 179 N. C., 307 ; Williams v. Williams, 175 N. C., 160 ; Springs v. Hopkins, 171 N. C., 486 . | 2 | 1926–1941 |
John L. Roper Lumber Co. v. Herrington
neutral
2 sentences1941Seawell v. Hall, 185 N. C., 80 ; Lumber Co. v. Herrington, 183 N. C., 85 ; Pugh v. Allen, 179 N. C., 307 ; Williams v. Williams, 175 N. C., 160 ; Springs v. Hopkins, 171 N. C., 486 .” In Buckner v. Maynard, 198 N. C., 802 , it was held: “While ordinarily and standing alone an estate conveyed by deed to ‘R and children, her bodily heirs and assigns,’ would carry a fee-simple estate to R, it will not so operate when taking the deed in its entirety, the intent of the grantor is ascertained to convey the lands to E and ber children as tenants in common, and such intent is in conformity with like e 1926Seawell v. Hall, 185 N. C., 80 ; Lumber Co. v. Herrington, 183 N. C., 85 ; Pugh v. Allen, 179 N. C., 307 ; Williams v. Williams, 175 N. C., 160 ; Springs v. Hopkins, 171 N. C., 486 . | 2 | 1926–1941 |
Springs v. . Hopkins
green
2 sentences1941Seawell v. Hall, 185 N. C., 80 ; Lumber Co. v. Herrington, 183 N. C., 85 ; Pugh v. Allen, 179 N. C., 307 ; Williams v. Williams, 175 N. C., 160 ; Springs v. Hopkins, 171 N. C., 486 .” In Buckner v. Maynard, 198 N. C., 802 , it was held: “While ordinarily and standing alone an estate conveyed by deed to ‘R and children, her bodily heirs and assigns,’ would carry a fee-simple estate to R, it will not so operate when taking the deed in its entirety, the intent of the grantor is ascertained to convey the lands to E and ber children as tenants in common, and such intent is in conformity with like e 1926Seawell v. Hall, 185 N. C., 80 ; Lumber Co. v. Herrington, 183 N. C., 85 ; Pugh v. Allen, 179 N. C., 307 ; Williams v. Williams, 175 N. C., 160 ; Springs v. Hopkins, 171 N. C., 486 . | 2 | 1926–1941 |
Pugh v. . Allen
green
2 sentences1941Seawell v. Hall, 185 N. C., 80 ; Lumber Co. v. Herrington, 183 N. C., 85 ; Pugh v. Allen, 179 N. C., 307 ; Williams v. Williams, 175 N. C., 160 ; Springs v. Hopkins, 171 N. C., 486 .” In Buckner v. Maynard, 198 N. C., 802 , it was held: “While ordinarily and standing alone an estate conveyed by deed to ‘R and children, her bodily heirs and assigns,’ would carry a fee-simple estate to R, it will not so operate when taking the deed in its entirety, the intent of the grantor is ascertained to convey the lands to E and ber children as tenants in common, and such intent is in conformity with like e 1926Seawell v. Hall, 185 N. C., 80 ; Lumber Co. v. Herrington, 183 N. C., 85 ; Pugh v. Allen, 179 N. C., 307 ; Williams v. Williams, 175 N. C., 160 ; Springs v. Hopkins, 171 N. C., 486 . | 2 | 1926–1941 |
Porter v. . Durham
green
2 sentences1941It was asserted in Porter v. Durham, 74 N. C., 767 , as being an elementary principle, which is founded on reason and equity, and common both to the civil and common law, that the owner of land cannot raise any barrier or dyke, even for better enjoyment of his own property, so as to obstruct the natural drainage of another’s land and thus intercept and throw back the water upon it. ‘An owner may not use his property absolutely as he pleases. 1907It was asserted in Porter v. Durham, 74 N. C., 767 , as being an elementary principle, which is founded on reason and equity, and common both to the civil . and common law, that the owner of land cannot raise any barrier or dyke, even for the better enjoyment of his own property, so as to obstruct the natural drainage of another’s land and thus intercept and throw back the water upon it. | 2 | 1907–1941 |
Young v. . Jeffreys
neutral
2 sentences1930Porter v. Construction Co., 195 N. C., 328 ; Patton v. Lumber Co., 179 N. C., 103 ; Faust v. Rohr, 166 N. C., 187 ; Young v. Jeffreys, 20 N. C., 357 . 1930Porter v. Construction Co. , 195 N.C. 328 ; Patton v. Lumber Co. , 179 N.C. 103 ; Faust v. Rohr , 166 N.C. 187 ; Young v. *Page 764 Jeffreys , 20 N.C. 357 . | 2 | 1930–1930 |
Patton v. Sinclaire Lumber Co.
green
2 sentences1930Porter v. Construction Co., 195 N. C., 328 ; Patton v. Lumber Co., 179 N. C., 103 ; Faust v. Rohr, 166 N. C., 187 ; Young v. Jeffreys, 20 N. C., 357 . 1930Porter v. Construction Co. , 195 N.C. 328 ; Patton v. Lumber Co. , 179 N.C. 103 ; Faust v. Rohr , 166 N.C. 187 ; Young v. *Page 764 Jeffreys , 20 N.C. 357 . | 2 | 1930–1930 |
Faust v. . Rohr
green
2 sentences1930Porter v. Construction Co., 195 N. C., 328 ; Patton v. Lumber Co., 179 N. C., 103 ; Faust v. Rohr, 166 N. C., 187 ; Young v. Jeffreys, 20 N. C., 357 . 1930Porter v. Construction Co. , 195 N.C. 328 ; Patton v. Lumber Co. , 179 N.C. 103 ; Faust v. Rohr , 166 N.C. 187 ; Young v. *Page 764 Jeffreys , 20 N.C. 357 . | 2 | 1930–1930 |
Porter & Peck v. West Construction Co.
green
2 sentences1930Porter v. Construction Co., 195 N. C., 328 ; Patton v. Lumber Co., 179 N. C., 103 ; Faust v. Rohr, 166 N. C., 187 ; Young v. Jeffreys, 20 N. C., 357 . 1930Porter v. Construction Co. , 195 N.C. 328 ; Patton v. Lumber Co. , 179 N.C. 103 ; Faust v. Rohr , 166 N.C. 187 ; Young v. *Page 764 Jeffreys , 20 N.C. 357 . | 2 | 1930–1930 |
Walker v. . Cooper
neutral
2 sentences1917Moffitt v. Maness, 102 N. C., 457 ; Cobb v. Clegg, 137 N. C., 153 ; Basnight v. Jobbing Co., 148 N. C., 356 ; Walker v. Venters, 148 N. C., 389 ; Medicine Co. v. Mizzell, ib., 384; Walker v. Cooper, 150 N. C., 128 ; Woodson v. Beck, 151 N. C., 144 ; Machinery Co. v. McClamrock, 152 N. C., 405 ; and especially Fertilizer Works v. McLawhorn, 158 N. C., 275 .” See, also, Bland v. Harvester Co., supra. There was no evidence of authority upon the part of the agent to waive any provision of the contract and to make an oral agreement. 1915Moffitt v. Maness, 102 N. C., 457 ; Cobb v. Clegg, 137 N. C., 153 ; Basnight v. Jobbing Co., 148 N. C., 356 ; Walker v. Venters, 148 N. C., 389 ; Medicine Co. v. Mizzell, ibid., 384; Walker v. Cooper, 150 N. C., 128 ; Woodson v. Beck, 151 N. C., 144 ; Machinery Co. v. McClamrock, 152 N. C., 405 , and especially Fertilizer Works v. McLawhorn, 158 N. C., 275 . | 2 | 1915–1917 |
J. I. Case Threshing MacHine Co. v. McClamrock
neutral
2 sentences1917Moffitt v. Maness, 102 N. C., 457 ; Cobb v. Clegg, 137 N. C., 153 ; Basnight v. Jobbing Co., 148 N. C., 356 ; Walker v. Venters, 148 N. C., 389 ; Medicine Co. v. Mizzell, ib., 384; Walker v. Cooper, 150 N. C., 128 ; Woodson v. Beck, 151 N. C., 144 ; Machinery Co. v. McClamrock, 152 N. C., 405 ; and especially Fertilizer Works v. McLawhorn, 158 N. C., 275 .” See, also, Bland v. Harvester Co., supra. There was no evidence of authority upon the part of the agent to waive any provision of the contract and to make an oral agreement. 1915Moffitt v. Maness, 102 N. C., 457 ; Cobb v. Clegg, 137 N. C., 153 ; Basnight v. Jobbing Co., 148 N. C., 356 ; Walker v. Venters, 148 N. C., 389 ; Medicine Co. v. Mizzell, ibid., 384; Walker v. Cooper, 150 N. C., 128 ; Woodson v. Beck, 151 N. C., 144 ; Machinery Co. v. McClamrock, 152 N. C., 405 , and especially Fertilizer Works v. McLawhorn, 158 N. C., 275 . | 2 | 1915–1917 |
Marks v. Cotton Mills.
green
2 sentences1911We said as much in Marks v. Cotton Mills, 135 N. C., 287 , and added: “He meets the requirements of the law if in the selection of machinery and appliances he uses that degree of care which a man of ordinary prudence would use, having regard to his own safety, if he were supplying them for his own personal use. 1911We said as much in Marks v. Cotton Mills , 135 N.C. 287 , and added: "He meets the requirements of the law if in the selection of machinery and appliances he uses that degree of care which a man of ordinary prudence would use, having regard to his own safety, if he were supplying them for his own personal use. | 2 | 1911–1911 |
| Basnight v. Southern Jobbing Co. neutral | 2 | 1909–1909 |
| Dr. Shoop Medicine Co. v. J. A. Mizell & Co. green | 2 | 1909–1909 |
| In re B.E. green | 1 | 2009–2009 |
| In Re BE green | 1 | 2009–2009 |
| Finkel v. Finkel neutral | 1 | 2007–2007 |
| Griffis v. Lazarovich neutral | 1 | 2007–2007 |
| State v. . Gibson green | 1 | 2000–2000 |
| State v. Simmons green | 1 | 2000–2000 |
| State v. Duboise green | 1 | 1983–1983 |
| Johnson v. Lamb green | 1 | 1981–1981 |
| Brown v. . Daniel neutral | 1 | 1981–1981 |
| Link v. Link green | 1 | 1981–1981 |
| Rural Plumbing & Heating, Inc. v. H. C. Jones Construction Co. green | 1 | 1981–1981 |
| Mazda Motors of America, Inc. v. Southwestern Motors, Inc. green | 1 | 1980–1980 |
| Food House, Inc. v. Coble, SEC. of Revenue green | 1 | 1980–1980 |
| Gregory v. Lynch green | 1 | 1979–1979 |
| Matthews ex rel. Bralley v. Lineberry neutral | 1 | 1979–1979 |
| State Ex Rel. North Carolina Utilities Commission v. Old Fort Finishing Plant green | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.