Walls v. Strickland
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal from O. II. Allen, J., heard at chambers, Lee County, 8 July, 1917. This is an action for a mandamus to compel the defendants, owners of a telephone line, to install a telephone.
Read the full summary
Appeal from O. II. Allen, J., heard at chambers, Lee County, 8 July, 1917. This is an action for a mandamus to compel the defendants, owners of a telephone line, to install a telephone. The facts are set out in the judgment rendered, which is as follows: This cause coming on to be heard before the undersigned judge of the Superior Court, at chambers, and being heard, and it appearing that the plaintiff, more than ten days before the return date of the summons, caused summons to be served with a copy of his complaint on the defendant, and that on the return date the parties aj>peared, and the…
1ConcurrenceOlaRK, C. J.
I, sec. 19, provides that “The ancient mode of trial by. jury is one of the best securities of the rights of the people, and ought to remain sacred and inviolable.” In proceedings before the Corporation Commission there is no jury trial provided, and hence if no appeal lies therefrom by the plaintiff he is deprived of this sacred and inviolable right. It is solely upon the ground that an appeal gives the right of trial by jury that the acts creating Eecorders courts have been held constitutional. S. v. Lytle, 138 N. C., 138; S. v. Shine, 149 N. C., 482, and many other cases. We have held that…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- State v. Shine.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
- Corporation Commission v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
- Young v. . RollinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1884
- State v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
- Clement v. Ireland.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.