Ivester v. City of Winston-Salem
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtClakksoN, J.
We think there was error in granting the nonsuit, as the evidence was sufficient to be submitted to the jury.
In Shute v. Monroe, 187 N. C., 676 (683), is tbe following: “Tbe Anglo-Saxon bolds no material thing dearer tban tbe ownership of land, bis home is termed bis ‘castle.’ Although there is nothing in tbe Constitution of North Carolina that expressly prohibits the taking of private property for public use without compensation (the clause of the United States Constitution to that effect applies only to act by the United States and not to government of the State), yet the principle is so…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Johnston v. . RankinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1874
- Rhodes v. . DurhamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- Metz v. City of AshevilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
- Reed v. State Highway & Public Works CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Gray v. City of High PointSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Long v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
- Bormann v. KOSSUTH COUNTY BD. OF SUP'RSSupreme Court of Iowa · 1998
- Sale v. State Highway & Public Works CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- Midgett v. North Carolina State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
- McKinney v. City of High PointSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.