Morgan v. High Penn Oil Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtErvin, J.
Each defendant assigns as error the disallowance of its motion for a compulsory nonsuit. We consider these assignments of error separately because the defendants urge different reasons to sustain their respective positions.
The High Penn Oil Company contends that the evidence is not sufficient to establish either an actionable or an abatable private nuisance. This contention rests on a twofold argument somewhat alternative in character. The High Penn Oil Company asserts primarily that private nuisances are classified as nuisances per se or at law, and nuisances per accidens or in fact; that…
2Cases cited99 opinions
- McFarlane v. City of Niagara FallsNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Taylor v. City of CincinnatiOhio Supreme Court · 1944
- Bohan v. Port Jervis Gaslight Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Moran v. Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1948
- Ryan v. City of EmmetsburgSupreme Court of Iowa · 1942
94 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Morgan v. High Penn Oil Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1953