Legal Opinion

DeBruhl v. State Highway & Public Works Commission

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 12, 1956No. 99PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRodmaN, J.

The basic question in this case is: What is the property for which compensation is to be paid? At the pretrial conference in October 1954 the court concluded that compensation was to be paid for the land taken, excluding any house thereon. The order fixing the issue to be submitted to the jury became the theory on which the case was to be tried. So long as that remained the pattern on which the case was to be tried, the evidence should be confined to the value of the land. Evidence tending to show the value of the house was not germane and hence was not competent. Godfrey v. Power Co., 190…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Gould Morris Electric Co. v. Atlantic Fire Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  2. North Carolina State Highway & Public Works Commission v. BlackSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  3. Jones v. . CasstevensSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  4. Proctor v. Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  5. Godfrey v. . Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1925

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

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Weyerhaeuser Company v. Carolina Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  2. Wilson v. McClennySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  3. Briggs v. American & Efird Mills, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  4. CCT Equipment Co. v. Hertz CorporationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  5. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. Nello L. Teer Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1959

27 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