Legal Opinion

EQUIPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION v. Scheidt

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 14, 1959No. 454PublishedCited by 7 opinions

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

  1. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. WulfSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  2. Michigan Public Utilities Commission v. DukeSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  3. State v. . KellerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  4. Smith v. . DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
  5. Dyer v. . DyerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Spruill v. Lake Phelps Volunteer Fire Department, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 2000
  2. King v. Town of Chapel HillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2014
  3. Myrtle Desk Company v. ClaytonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1970
  4. Chrismon v. Guilford CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
  5. Chrismon v. Guilford CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988

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

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

Powered by the Exa API