Legal Opinion

Broadhurst v. Board of Commissioners

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 4, 1928PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCoNNOR, J.

The Pender County Drainage District No. 4, was established prior to the enactment of chapter 7, Public Laws 1921. The provision of said statute “that the districts heretofore or hereafter created under the law shall be and constitute political subdivisions of the State” does not determine the nature of said district, at least for all purposes.

In O’Neal v. Mann, 193 N. C., 153, we said: “Whatever may have been the purpose of the General Assembly in enacting this statute, and thereby amending chapter 442, Public Laws 1909, it cannot be held to have affected the nature or character of a district…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Henry v. . HilliardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
  2. Dockery v. Fairbanks-Morse Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
  3. May v. Stimson Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1896
  4. Cowles v. CowlesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
  5. Alexander v. . AlexanderSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State v. . LeaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
  2. Haines v. Burlington County Bridge CommissionNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1949
  3. Davis v. Federal Land BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  4. Rutherford College, Inc. v. PayneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
  5. East Coast Fertilizer Co. v. HardeeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936

1 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