Legal Opinion

Stathopoulos v. Shook

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 14, 1959No. 256PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBobbitt, J.

While he alleged the location and operation of the automatic traffic control signal placed in the intersection by the City of Charlotte, plaintiff did not allege the city ordinance. Ordinarily, before legal rights may be predicated thereon, there must be both allegation and proof of such ordinance. Smith v. Buie, 243 N.C. 209, 90 S.E. 2d 514; Lutz Industries, Inc., v. Dixie Home Stores, 242 N.C. 332, 343, 88 S.E. 2d 333; Wilson v. Kennedy, 248 N.C. 74, 102 S.E. 2d 459; G.S. 160-272.

In Cox v. Freight Lines, 236 N.C. 72, 79, 72 S.E. 2d 25, it was held that the defect (failure to plead the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Lutz Industries, Inc. v. Dixie Home StoresSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  2. Cox v. Hennis Freight LinesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  3. Hyder v. ASHEVILLE STORAGE BATTERY COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  4. Marshburn v. PattersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  5. In Re the Will of ThompsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1958

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Bowen v. CONSTRUCTORS EQUIPMENT RENTAL COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
  2. Anderson v. CarterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  3. Hawley v. Indemnity Insurance Co. of North AmericaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  4. Jones v. SchafferSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  5. Mayberry v. Charlotte City Coach Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1963

10 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