Arnold v. . Porter

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Arnold v. . Porter

25 S.E. 785, 119 N.C. 123

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedSeptember 5, 1896

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 25 S.E. 785 (Arnold v. . Porter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Arnold v. . Porter, 25 S.E. 785, 119 N.C. 123 (N.C. 1896).

Pincite

Opinion

MONTGOMERY, J.:

It was intended, it seems, to submit without action a case containing facts upon which the controversy depends, under Section 567 of The Code. It *124 appears that the affidavit required by the statute, to the effect that the controversy is real and that the proceeding is in good faith to determine the rights of the parties, was never made or filed. Such an affidavit is a prerequisite to the exercise of jurisdiction in the matter. Jones v. Com missioners, 88 N. C., 56 ; Grant v. Newsom, 81 N. C., 86. The proceeding must be dismissed.

Dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MONTGOMERY, J.:

It was intended, it seems, to submit without action a case containing facts upon which the controversy depends, under Section 567 of The Code. It *124 appears that the affidavit required by the statute, to the effect that the controversy is real and that the proceeding is in good faith to determine the rights of the parties, was never made or filed. Such an affidavit is a prerequisite to the exercise of jurisdiction in the matter. Jones v. Com missioners, 88 N. C., 56 ; Grant v. Newsom, 81 N. C., 86. The proceeding must be dismissed.

Dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 S.E. 785, 119 N.C. 123, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arnold-v-porter-nc-1896.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack