Blake v. Norman
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
CLARK, Judge.
Defendants’ plea that the Batson and Cutts cases are res judicata and a bar to plaintiffs’ claim requires an examination of these cases, which were introduced in evidence at the hearing on defendants’ plea. See Batson v. Bell, 249 N.C. 718, 107 S.E. 2d 562 (1959), and Cutts v. Casey, 271 N.C. 165, 155 S.E. 2d 519 (1967); 275 N.C. 599, 170 S.E. 2d 598 (1969); and 278 N.C. 390, 180 S.E. 2d 297 (1971).
In both the Batson and Cutts cases plaintiffs traced title to land grant No. 1696, dated 20 April 1859, from the State of North Carolina to Jesse W. Batson, conveying 51 acres of land…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Commissioner v. SunnenSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Cromwell v. County of SacSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Bigelow v. Old Dominion Copper Mining & Smelting Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1912
- King v. GrindstaffSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
- Cutts v. CaseySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Merrick v. PetersonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
- Tar Landing Villas Owners' Ass'n v. Town of Atlantic BeachCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
- Green v. DixonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
- Branks v. KernCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
- Green v. DixonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.