Legal Opinion

Hester v. . Traction Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 2, 1905PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The plaintiff owns the lot which occupies the (289) apex of the acute angle which lies at the junction of Main and Chapel Hill streets in the city of Durham. The defendant, by permission of the board of aldermen of the city, laid a curved track to pass from one street to the other, as per below diagram.

This track was located and laid under the direction of the street commissioner, who made his report to the board of aldermen, the expenses of the work being borne by the defendant. This curved track was used in the summer, in the evenings from 6:30 until the cars went to the barn for the night,…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Moose v. . CarsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
  2. Bunch v. Town of EdentonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1884
  3. Tate v. City of GreensboroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1894
  4. In Re Will of MuellerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
  5. White v. Northwestern North Carolina RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Purser v. LedbetterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
  2. Dunning Ex Rel. Sowers v. Forsyth Warehouse Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  3. Rowe v. City of CincinnatiOhio Supreme Court · 1927
  4. Ham v. City of DurhamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  5. Wood v. Phoenix-Tempe Stone Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1929

3 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