Legal Opinion
Williams v. STATE HIGHWAY COM. OF NORTH CAROLINA
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided May 18, 1960No. 314PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWiNBORNE, C. J.
At the outset it is noted that Exceptions 1, 2, 9, 29 and 30 were expressly abandoned by petitioners, and Exceptions 5, 6, 7, 10 and 32 not having been set out in appellants’ brief, are taken as abandoned by them. Harmon v. Harmon, 245 N.C. 83, 95 S.E. 2d 355; Lieb v. Mayer, 244 N.C. 613, 94 S.E. 2d 658.
Nevertheless appellants assign as error the exclusion of certain testimony offered by them relating to a Mr. Cabe, an alleged agent of respondent. Part of this testimony consisted of observations of and conversations with Mr. Cabe by petitioner Ransom Williams in the course of settlement…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Olson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- United States v. Toronto, Hamilton & Buffalo Navigation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- People v. Ocean Shore Railroad, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1948
- Barnes v. North Carolina State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
- Nantahala Power & Light Co. v. MossSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Ferrell v. Department of TransportationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1993
- Smith v. SimpsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
- ITT-Industrial Credit Co. v. Milo Concrete Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976
- Kirkman v. State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
- State Highway Commission v. Assembly of God, PentecostalOregon Supreme Court · 1962
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.