State Ex Rel. Cooper v. Crisco
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtAdaMs, J.
The writ of quo warranto and proceedings by information in the nature of quo warranto have been abolished and the remedies available at common law under these forms may now be obtained by a .civil action; but when a private citizen desires to bring such action in the name of the State he must apply to the Attorney-General for leave and tender satisfactory security to indemnify the State against all costs and expenses which may accrue in consequence of the action. C. S., 869, 871.
After obtaining leave from the Attorney-General the plaintiff instituted his first action against the defendant on…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Prevatt v. Harrelson.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
- Hampton v. . Spinning CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
- Meekins v. Norfolk & Southern RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1902
- Starling v. Selma Cotton MillsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
- Hood v. . Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- State ex rel. Freeman v. PonderSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- Wiley Electric, Inc. v. BrantleySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1988
- Burton v. City of ReidsvilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
- Howle v. Twin States Express, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
- Carolina Transportation & Distributing Co. v. American Alliance InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.