Shapiro v. City of Winston-Salem
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBaeNHIll, J.
It may be that if necessary the Court would take judicial notice of the plan under which a duly constituted agency of the Federal Government operates. In this case, however, it is not necessary for us to do so. The record sufficiently discloses the plan under which the Works Progress Administration was improving Hanes Park, which belongs to the city of Winston-Salem. The uncontradicted evidence discloses that the defendánt Masten Hawkes was on the pay roll of the city of Winston-Salem at the time of the occurrence complained of, which resulted in the death of the plaintiff’s intestate. It…
2Cited by26 opinions
- McFarland v. Dixie MacHinery & Equipment Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1941
- Lewis v. BarnhillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
- DeArmon v. B. Mears Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
- Wylie-Stewart MacHinery Co. v. ThomasSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1943
- Coker v. GunterSupreme Court of Virginia · 1951
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.