Legal Opinion

Young v. City of Asheville

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 23, 1955No. 103PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtParker, J.

The defendants’ sole assignments of error are the refusal of the Trial Court to sustain their separate motions for judgments of nonsuit made at the close of plaintiff’s evidence, and renewed at the close of all the evidence.

The defendants have filed a joint brief. Their argument that the action should have been nonsuited is based upon three grounds. First, that the plaintiff has neither alleged, nor offered evidence tending to show that his lessor was a riparian owner, or had acquired in some way riparian rights in the waters of Beaverdam Creek, and if they, or either of them polluted the…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. Illinois Central Railroad v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  2. Crawford Co. v. HathawayNebraska Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Hilt v. WeberMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
  4. Durham v. Cotton Mills.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  5. Whichard v. LipeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Midgett v. North Carolina State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
  2. Guilford Realty & Insurance Co. v. Blythe Bros. Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
  3. Eller v. Board of Education of Buncombe CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  4. Young v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1978
  5. Cassidy v. State, Department of Natural ResourcesCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1986

4 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