Legal Opinion

Hoyle v. City of Hickory

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 10, 1913PublishedCited by 14 opinions

Appeal by defendant from Cline, J., at July Term, 1913, of Catawba.

1Opinion of the CourtClakk, C. J.

Tbe defendant in grading Ninth Avenue in that city found it necessary to place a fill between 5 and 6 feet bigli in front of a bouse, belonging to tbe plaintiffs, wbicb was located in a depression. There was no condemnation proceedings, ás tbe city did not take any portion of tbe property belonging to tbe plaintiffs. This action was brought, alleging that tbe fill was negligently constructed. Tbe evidence is that the work was executed for tbe city in accordance with tbe plans, specifications, and directions of tbe city engineer. It was not denied that tbe city acted in good faith in grading…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Transportation Co. v. ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
  2. Meares v. Commissioners of the Town of WilmingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1848
  3. Ward v. Commissioners of Beaufort CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
  4. Dorsey v. Town of HendersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
  5. Wright v. . the City of WilmingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Sanders v. . SmithfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  2. Milling Co. v. . Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  3. Bennett v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
  4. Sanders v. Town of SmithfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  5. Rockingham Square Shopping Center, Inc. v. Town of MadisonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API