Mayo v. . Thigpen
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was a oivil ACTION, tried at Spring Term, 1890, of Edgecombe Superior Court, before Womach, J. The facts are sufficiently set out in the opinion of the Court.
1DissentMerrimon, C. J.
The facts are sufficiently set out in the opinion of the Court. This is a petition for a cartway. The township supervisors, after "hearing the testimony, viewed the premises and maturely considered the whole matter," all parties being present, adjudged that it was "necessary, reasonable and just" that the petitioner should have the cartway prayed for, and appointed freeholders to lay off the same and assess damages. From this order the defendant appealed to the board of county commissioners, who, "after hearing testimony pro and con, and argument of counsel," sustained in all respects the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Johnson v. StanleyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989
- Candler v. SluderSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
- State ex rel. Granite Investment Co. v. Superior CourtWashington Supreme Court · 1924
- Ford v. . ManningSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910