Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

City of Raleigh v. Mechanics & Farmers Bank

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided July 14, 1943Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

WiNbobne, J., with whom Stacy, 0. J., and Barnhill, J.,

concur, dissenting: The .questions involved on this appeal are of great concern not only to all taxpayers within the city of Raleigh but to all those in every municipality in the State of North Carolina. The statute pleaded by defendant in limitation of this action is in derogation of sovereign authority and of common right. The case calls for deliberate consideration in the “cold neutrality” of law and justice unaffected by pride of opinion in former decisions rendered by this Court.

The appellant, city of Raleigh, challenges, and seeks…

2Cases cited82 opinions

  1. Guaranty Trust Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Bauman v. RossSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  3. Providence Bank v. BillingsSupreme Court of the United States · 1830
  4. Spencer v. MerchantSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  5. E. I. Dupont De Nemours & Co. v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1924

77 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