Horton v. Interstate Telephone & Telegraph Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtClaeKSON, J.
Tbe defendant is a public service corporation. The present action is in its nature a mandamus to compel defendant to perform a duty which plaintiff alleges it owed him as a public service corporation and install a telephone in plaintiff’s place of business and place the name T. J. Horton Company in defendant’s telephone directory. A mandamus is a proper remedy in such cases when the facts warrant. Godwin v. Telephone Co., 136 N. C., 259; Telephone Co. v. Telephone Co., 159 N. C., 16; Walls v. Strickland, 174 N. C., 298; Public Service Co. v. Power Co., 179 N. C., 18; Public Service Co. v.…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Southwestern Telegraph & Telephone Co. v. DanaherSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- North Carolina Public Service Co. v. Southern Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
- Cumberland Telegraph & Telephone Co. v. HobartMississippi Supreme Court · 1906
- Godwin v. Telephone Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- Commercial Union Telegraph Co. v. New England Telephone & Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1888
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Home Owners' Loan Corp. v. Logan CityUtah Supreme Court · 1939
- Webb v. Diamond State Telephone CompanyCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1967
- Jordan v. Clarke-Washington Electric Membership Corp.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1955
- Bennett v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
- Bennett v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.