Legal Opinion

Moses v. Town of Morganton

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 9, 1926PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClabicsoN, J.

The defendant, International Shoe Company, contends: “It clearly appears from the allegations of the complaint that the three defendants herein are not joint tort-feasors, but, if tort-feasors at all, that they acted independently, without concert or collusion and not in pursuit of any common design to pollute tbe waters of Hunting Creek. One — the town of Morganton — in the effort to discharge its corporate powers, saw fit to discharge the contents of its sewers into the stream; the other — the Western Carolina Power Company — in the exercise of its corporate powers and duties, saw fit to…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. IdeSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
  2. Pirie v. TvedtSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
  3. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. DowellSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  4. Sloane v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  5. McDaniel v. City of CherryvaleSupreme Court of Kansas · 1913

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Hall v. EI Du Pont De Nemours & Co., Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 1972
  2. Ballinger v. . ThomasSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
  3. McCreery v. Eli Lilly & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1978
  4. Clinard v. Town of KernersvilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
  5. Trust Co. v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1936

15 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