Darr v. Carolina Aluminum Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtWiNBORNE, J.
The evidence presented in the record on this appeal, considered in the light most favorable to plaintiffs, is insufficient to require the submission of issues to the jury.
The action is laid upon allegations that defendant has obstructed the natural flow of watercourses over plaintiffs’ land.
Plaintiffs offered evidence tending to show that it is the obstructing of the flow of water in Meadow Ditch on the lands of the Shoaf heirs that has caused the alleged damage to their. land. But on the very threshold of the case there is a lack of evidence tending to show that Meadow Ditch is a natural…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Snowden v. . BellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
- Weaver v. . PittsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
- Hemphill v. . Board of AldermenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
- Porter v. DurhamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1876
- City of Durham v. WrightSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Dethlefs v. Beau Maison Development Corp.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1987
- Sheffet v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
- Speight v. . AndersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
- Gibson v. DudleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- Johnson v. City of Winston-SalemSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.