Town of Hillsborough v. Smith

Decision Date02 February 1971
CitationTown of Hillsborough v. Smith, 178 S.E.2d 831, 277 N.C. 727 (N.C. 1971)
PartiesTOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH, v. Clarence Dupree SMITH et al.
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court

Graham & Cheshire, for plaintiff.

Alonzo Brown Coleman, Jr., for defendants.

Petition for writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, 178 S.E.2d 18. Denied.

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
4 cases
  • High Point Bank v. Highmark Props., LLC
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 3 Diciembre 2013
    ...of a guarantor under a guaranty agreement); and in Town v. Smith, 10 N.C.App. 70, 74, 178 S.E.2d 18, 21 (1970), cert. denied,277 N.C. 727, 178 S.E.2d 831 (1971), where we stated that “[a] surety for an idiot or an infant, or a surety for a corporation or governmental entity acting ultra vir......
  • Edwards v. Akion, 8010SC961
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 7 Julio 1981
    ...Hill, 276 N.C. 172, 171 S.E.2d 427 (1970); Town of Hillsborough v. Smith, 10 N.C.App. 70, 178 S.E.2d 18 (1970), cert. denied, 277 N.C. 727, 178 S.E.2d 831 (1971). This immunity is waived only under the authority of statute. Id. N.C.G.S. 160A-485(a) authorizes a city to waive its immunity fr......
  • Baucom's Nursery Co. v. Mecklenburg County
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 5 Abril 1988
    ...14 N.C.App. 44, 187 S.E.2d 345 (1972); Town of Hillsborough v. Smith, 10 N.C.App. 70, 178 S.E.2d 18 (1970), cert. denied, 277 N.C. 727, 178 S.E.2d 831 (1971). The individual county commissioners are likewise engaged in the performance of a governmental function in either enacting or enforci......
  • Simon, Matter of
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 18 Abril 1978
    ...the language he actually used. See generally Town of Hillsborough v. Smith, 10 N.C.App. 70, 178 S.E.2d 18 (1970), cert. denied 277 N.C. 727, 178 S.E.2d 831 (1971). Therefore, in this case, respondent is liable on the bond for "any probable loss by reason of the delay." Although G.S. 1-292 d......