From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wilson v. Neal

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jun 1, 1900
36 S.E. 1024 (N.C. 1900)

Opinion

(Decided 5 June, 1900.)

Quo Warranto — Clerk Superior Court of Forsyth County — Clerk of the Western District Criminal Court for Forsyth County.

This case is controlled by the decision in White v. Murray, ante, 153.

Quo Warranto brought by the relator to try the title of the defendant as clerk of the Criminal Court of Forsyth County, tried before Shaw, J., at November Term, 1899, of FORSYTH upon the following

Holton Alexander and Watson, Buxton Watson for plaintiff.

Glenn Manly for defendant.


FACTS AGREED.

It is agreed in the above-entitled cause, that at a general election held in November, 1898, N. S. Wilson, plaintiff relator, was elected clerk of the Superior Court of Forsyth County, and duly qualified and entered upon the duties of the said office. It is also agreed that the amount of fees from civil and probate business received by the clerk of the Superior Court of Forsyth County averages $1,500 per year and the fees received from criminal actions, $1,200 per year.

It is also agreed, that S. T. Neal, the defendant, under the provisions of acts of the General Assembly of 1899, ch. 371 and 594, was appointed clerk of the Criminal Court of Forsyth County in the Western District Criminal Court, and duly qualified as said clerk and entered upon the duties of said office, and now duly performs the duties of said clerk of the Criminal Court of Forsyth County as provided by said Act of Assembly, receiving the fees and emoluments thereof. (782)

WATSON, BUXTON WATSON, HOLTON ALEXANDER, Attorneys for Plaintiff Relator. GLENN MANLY, Attorneys for S. T. Neal.

His Honor, upon consideration, rendered judgment in favor of defendant, S. T. Neal, and plaintiff relator, N. S. Wilson, appealed to the Supreme Court.


From the facts agreed in this case it appears that the same questions of law are presented for our consideration and decision that were presented in the case of White v. Murray, ante, 153. The opinion in that case must govern us in deciding this case, and the judgment of the court below, holding that plaintiff could not recover, is

Affirmed.

(783)


Summaries of

Wilson v. Neal

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jun 1, 1900
36 S.E. 1024 (N.C. 1900)
Case details for

Wilson v. Neal

Case Details

Full title:STATE EX REL. N. S. WILSON v. STEPHEN T. NEAL

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Jun 1, 1900

Citations

36 S.E. 1024 (N.C. 1900)
126 N.C. 781

Citing Cases

Strauss v. Life Association

E. S. Street against same defendant. Same counsel appearing. 36 S.E. 1024 DOUGLAS,…