Legal Opinion

Harris v. . Board of Education

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 20, 1939PublishedCited by 33 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarnhill, J.

It is well established by the decisions of this Court that mandamus is available against a municipal corporation or public official to compel the performance of a ministerial duty. But those seeking the writ must have a clear legal right to demand it and the board must be under a legal obligation to perform the act sought to be required. Rollins v. Rogers, 204 N. C., 308, 168 S. E., 206; John v. Allen, 207 N. C., 520, 177 S. E., 634; Mears v. Board of Education, 214 N. C., 89. The writ will not be issued to enforce an alleged right which is in doubt. Hayes v. Benton, 193 N. C., 379, 137 S.…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Ewbank v. Turner.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
  2. County Board of Education v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
  3. Hayes v. . BentonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
  4. Wilkinson v. . Board of EducationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  5. Mears v. . Board of EducationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938

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

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. Johnson v. BranchCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1966
  2. Pue v. . Hood, Comr. of BanksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  3. Morgan County Commission v. PowellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1974
  4. King v. BaldwinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  5. Brice v. Robertson House Moving, Wrecking & Salvage Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1958

28 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