Legal Opinion

Austin v. County of Dare

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 29, 1954No. 24PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBobbitt, J.

The court below denied plaintiffs’ application for a temporary restraining order, thus deciding the only question presented at the hearing. Thereafter, Dare County conveyed the lands to the United States of America for the consideration of $50,000.00. It was so stated upon the argument here. The sale and conveyance having been consummated, whether Judge Carr should have restrained the defendants, pen-dente lite, is now an academic question. It is quite obvious that a court cannot restrain the doing of that which has been already consummated. Surety Corp. v. Sharpe, 233 N.C. 644, 65 S.E. 2d…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Efird v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  2. Saunders v. BullaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  3. Savage v. City of KinstonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  4. National Surety Corp. v. SharpeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Citizens Addressing Reassignment & Education, Inc. v. Wake County Board of EducationCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2007
  2. Goad v. Chase Home Finance, LLCCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010
  3. Fulton v. City of MorgantonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
  4. Town of Nags Head v. TillettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
  5. In Re HackleyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2011

12 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