Legal Opinion

Hooper v. City of Wilmington

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided August 7, 1979No. 785SC1085PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CLARK, Judge.

Defendant first assigns as error the court’s finding of fact that the defendant had adopted, controlled and maintained Jumping Run Branch, since there was no evidence tending to show that the Branch had been dedicated to the City and evidence that the City adopted and controlled the Branch where it intersected with city streets does not constitute an adoption of the entire Branch.

“[T]he general rule is that a municipality becomes responsible for maintenance, and liable for injuries resulting from a want of due care in respect to upkeep, of drains and culverts constructed by third…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Cogdill v. North Carolina State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  2. Fast v. GulleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  3. Johnson v. City of Winston-SalemSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  4. MILNER HOTELS, INCORPORATED v. City of RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  5. Mitchell v. City of High PointCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Asheville Sports Properties, LLC v. City of AshevilleCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009
  2. Buckland v. Town of Haw RiverCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
  3. FIRST GASTON BANK v. City of HickoryCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010
  4. Firley v. Town of MarshallCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2026
  5. Lakeview Condominium Association v. Village of PinehurstCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API