Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

R. R. v. . R. R.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 5, 1890PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The plaintiff's petition was as follows:(17) The petition of the Durham and Northern Railway Company represents:

"1. That the petitioner is a corporation duly created and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of North Carolina.
"2. That the Richmond and Danville Railroad Company is a corporation duly created and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Virginia.
"3. That the North Carolina Railroad Company is a corporation duly created and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of North Carolina.
"4. That the North Carolina Railroad Company, many…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Brittain v. . MullSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1884
  2. State v. JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
  3. Liverman v. Roanoke & Tar River RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1894
  4. Strayhorn v. . BlalockSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
  5. Carolina-Tennessee Power Co. v. Hiawassee River Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1916

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Redevelopment Commission of Greensboro v. HaginsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  2. Liverman v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
  3. State Highway Commission v. MatthisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1968
  4. Power Co. v. . Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
  5. Carolina-Tennessee Power Co. v. Hiawassee River Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1916

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API