EQUIPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION v. Scheidt
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtDeNNy, J.
It is conceded that the only question for determination on this appeal is whether or not the plaintiff was a contract hauler or contract carrier within the meaning of G.S. 20-38 (r) (1) and G.S. 20-38 (t), and subject to contract hauler or contract carrier rates during the calendar years 1950, 1951 and 1952.
G.S. 20-38 (r) Property-Hauling Vehicles, — (1) Contract carrier vehicles, as of 1949, in pertinent part, read as follows: “Motor vehicles used for the transportation of property for hire, but not licensed as •common carrier of property vehicles under the provisions of sections ■62-121.5…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. WulfSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Michigan Public Utilities Commission v. DukeSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- State v. . KellerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
- Smith v. . DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
- Dyer v. . DyerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Spruill v. Lake Phelps Volunteer Fire Department, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 2000
- King v. Town of Chapel HillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2014
- Myrtle Desk Company v. ClaytonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1970
- Chrismon v. Guilford CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
- Chrismon v. Guilford CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.