Legal Opinion

Burrell v. . Hughes

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 5, 1895PublishedCited by 16 opinions

AotioN to recover a penalty of one hundred dollars alleged to be due by reason of the failure of defendant Sheriff to execute process in a criminal action — assigning four separate and distinct forfeitures by and because of said alleged failure (Code, See. 1112),heard before HoTte, Judge, upon demurrer to complaint, at October Term, 1894, of OeaNGB Superior Court.

Read the full summary

AotioN to recover a penalty of one hundred dollars alleged to be due by reason of the failure of defendant Sheriff to execute process in a criminal action — assigning four separate and distinct forfeitures by and because of said alleged failure (Code, See. 1112),heard before HoTte, Judge, upon demurrer to complaint, at October Term, 1894, of OeaNGB Superior Court. The plaintiff made affidavit that by reason of poverty he was unable to give bond or make deposit for costs for prosecution of suit. This was supported, as to his poverty, and the belief that he had a good cause of action, by the…

1Opinion of the Court

Eaircloth, C. J.:

The plaintiff instituted this action on defendant’s official bond for four penalties, in $100 each, for failing to serve process. The summons was issued in the name of the plaintiff “Dennis Burrell,” and the amended complaint declared in the name of the “State on relation of Dennis Burrell,” the plaintiff.

The defendant moved to dismiss the action and demurred because of the discrepancy in the summons and amended complaint and for want of jurisdiction in the Superior Court.

A motion to dismiss for want of jurisdiction or because the complaint does not state a cause of action is…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hussey v. . KirkmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1886
  2. State Ex Rel. Maggett v. RobertsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
  3. Joyner v. . RobertsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
  4. State Ex Rel. Commissioners of Warrenton v. ArringtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1888
  5. State Ex Rel. Jackson v. MaultsbySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1878

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Hopkins v. . BarnhardtSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
  2. Sloan v. Carolina Central RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1900
  3. Miami Copper Co. v. StateArizona Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Shelby v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
  5. Chambers v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1916

11 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