State Ex Rel. Bouldin v. Davis
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtAdams, J.
The relator does not allege that he is entitled to the office or to any of its emoluments; but this allegation is not essential to the maintenance of the action. A civil action in the nature of quo war-ranto may be brought by the Attorney-General in the name of the State upon his own information or upon the complaint of a private party. C. S., 869, 870. A relator need not be a contestant for the office, but he must be a citizen and taxpayer within the jurisdiction over which an incumbent of the contested office exercises the functions prescribed by law. Foard v. Hall, 111 N. C., 369; Hines v.…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Kilbourn v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Ames and Others v. State of Kansas Ex Rel. Johnston. Kansas Pac. Ry Co. v. SameSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Rhyne v. . LipscombeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
- Brown v. . TurnerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1874
- State Ex Rel. Foard v. HallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Britt v. . Board of CanvassersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
- State Ex rel.Swaringen v. PoplinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
- State ex rel. Barlow v. BenfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
- State Ex Rel. Sathre v. QuickstadNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1936
- State Ex Rel. Bouldin v. DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.