Board of Transportation v. Martin
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
BRITT, Justice.
Plaintiff did not except to any fact found by the trial court. Thus, the question presented is whether the court erred in its conclusions of law and in entering an order thereon. Hinson v. Jefferson, 287 N.C. 422, 215 S.E. 2d 102 (1975). The court concluded (1) that the parcel of land owned by South Hills Shopping Center, Inc., (South Hills) and the parcel of land owned by defendants Martin individually constituted a unit for the purpose of determining damages, and (2) that South Hills and its trustee in bankruptcy are proper parties to the action. We hold that the court erred…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Schenley Distillers Corporation v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Barnes v. North Carolina State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
- BW Acceptance Corporation v. SpencerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
- Sams v. Redevelopment AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
- Nantahala Power & Light Co. v. MossSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- State v. Ridgeway Brands Manufacturing, LLCSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2008
- Lyon v. BarrettSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1982
- Jay Group, Ltd. v. GlasgowCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
- State Ex Rel. Cooper v. Ridgeway BrandsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2008
- City of Winston-Salem v. YarbroughCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.