Legal Opinion

Williams v. North Carolina State Highway Commission

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 10, 1960No. 610PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWinboene, C. J.

The defendant North Carolina State Highway Commission, an unincorporated governmental agency of the State, is not subject to suit except in the manner expressly authorized by sta tute. Latham v. Highway Comm., 191 N.C. 141, 131 S.E. 385; McKinney v. Highway Comm., 192 N.C. 670, 135 S.E. 772; Schloss v. Highway Comm., 230 N.C. 489, 53 S.E. 2d 517; Moore v. Clark, 235 N.C. 364, 70 S.E. 2d 182; Cannon v. Wilmington, 242 N.C. 711, 89 S.E. 2d 595.

The authorized manner of suit against the Highway Commission to recover compensation for the taking of property is by a special proceeding in…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Long Island Water Supply Co. v. BrooklynSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  2. Sale v. State Highway & Public Works CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  3. Hedrick v. GrahamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  4. Schloss v. State Highway & Public Works CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  5. Moore v. ClarkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Guthrie v. North Carolina State Ports AuthoritySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
  2. Long v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  3. Shingleton v. StateSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
  4. State Ex Rel. Herman v. SchafferArizona Supreme Court · 1970
  5. State Ex Rel. Herman v. Tucson Title InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1966

14 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