Mabe v. City of Winston-Salem
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
Stacy, 0. J.,
after stating tbe case: It is conceded that tbe defendant, city of Winston-Salem, which owns a municipal light and waterworks system, and operates tbe same in its governmental capacity, cannot be held liable in damages for a failure to furnish a sufficient supply of either water or light. Howland v. Asheville, 174 N. C., 749; Harrington v. Greenville, 159 N. C., 632.
C. S., 2807, appearing in tbe chapter on “Municipal Corporations,” is as follows: “Tbe city may own and maintain its own light and waterworks system, to furnish water for fire and other purposes, and light to tbe city…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Gorrell v. Greensboro Water Supply Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1899
- Bunch v. Town of EdentonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1884
- Mendel & Co. v. City of WheelingWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1886
- Dorsey v. Town of HendersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
- Harrington v. Town of GreenvilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Rhodes v. City of AshevilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
- McKinney v. City of High PointSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
- State Ex Rel. East Lenoir Sanitary District v. City of LenoirSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1958
- Great American Insurance Company v. JohnsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
- City of Asheville v. StateCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2008
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.