Phillips v. Hassett Mining Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBarnhill, C. J.
Whether we say this is an action for damages resulting from a continuing trespass or for the maintenance of a nuisance or accord it some other name is immaterial. Irrespective of the nomenclature used, it is in essence an action in tort for the wrongful damage to and taking of the land of plaintiffs, without compensation, for private gain.
We have here a novel situation. The plaintiffs have not sued either Wilson or Southern. They were brought in as additional parties defendant under G.S. 1-240 so that Hassett may enforce its right of contribution in the event plaintiffs recover from it. Yet…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Bost v. . MetcalfeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
- Freeman v. . ThompsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
- Wilson v. . MassageeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
- Wilson v. MassageeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
- McKinney v. DeneenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Davis v. North Carolina State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
- Ipock v. GilmoreCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. HollandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
- Cox v. Robert C. Rhein Interest, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
- Griffin v. Tenneco Resins, Inc.District Court, W.D. North Carolina · 1986
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.