Hinshaw v. McIver
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtDevin, J.
It is settled law in this jurisdiction that mandamus will lie to compel the performance of a purely ministerial duty imposed by law, and that the party seeking the writ must have a clear legal right to demand it, and the party sought to be coerced must be under legal obligation to perform the.duty. Bryan v. Sanford, ante, 30, 97 S.E. 2d 420; Nebel v. Nebel, 241 N.C. 491 (499), 85 S.E. 2d 876; Harris v. Board of Education, 216 N.C. 147, 4 S.E. 2d 328. “Its purpose is to compel the performance of a ministerial duty — not to establish a. legal right, but to enforce one which has been…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Harris v. . Board of EducationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
- Turner v. . New BernSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
- St. George v. HansonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
- Prawdzik v. City of Grand RapidsMichigan Supreme Court · 1946
- Wake Forest v. . MedlinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
- Ponder v. JoslinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
- State v. NicholsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1978
- McDowell v. Randolph CountyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2007
- Watson v. Watson Seed Farms, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.