Norfolk Lumber Co. v. Smith
Supreme Court of North Carolina
ActioN beard upon proceedings for a restraining order by Plaintiff appealed. Tbis case was beard and decided at tbe September Term, 1907 (146 N. C., 158). A petition to rebear was filed and ordered to be docketed. The facts upon wbicb tbe decision was based are set out in tbe report of tbe case and need not be repeated, except in so far as tbey may be necessary to dispose of tbe petition to rebear.
1Opinion of the Court
CLARK, C. J., and WALKER, J., dissenting. Plaintiff appealed.
This case was heard and decided at the September Term, 1907 (146 N.C. 158). A petition to rehear was filed and ordered to be docketed. The facts upon which the decision was based are set out in the report of the case and need not be repeated, except in so far as they may be necessary to dispose of the petition to rehear. When this case was before us at a former term it was argued only on one side, plaintiffs' counsel filing a brief. Our attention is now called to language in the deed from Barnes to Etheridge, under which plaintiffs…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Norfolk Lumber Co. v. SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
3Cited by6 opinions
- Bateman v. Kramer Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
- Gilbert v. Waccamaw Shingle Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- Midland Timber Co. v. J. F. Prettyman & SonsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1914
- Gotham v. Wachsmuth Lumber Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1914
- Gilbert v. Waccamaw Shingle Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.